Changes

==[[User:Tmtoulouse]] blocked?==

==[[User:Tmtoulouse]] blocked?==

First, despite his "Parthian shot" at Aschlafly, a six month time period is grotesquely excessive; a few days would be more like it. I request that you reduce the length of the block to a week or less. I don't know what your justification is for anything beyond a timeout or cooldown period. This is not Willy on Wheels we're talking about, and in fact, despite perhaps being a difficult user, this is someone with some genuine expertise in biology and psychology.

I ask you to reduce [[User:Tmtoulouse]]'s block time to a week or less, and to provide an explanation on his Talk page, including links to diffs illustrating the issues mention ("Trolling, Abuse of power, Conspiracy to commit vandalism").

Second, when you block a user for any reason, and certainly for an extended period of time, you should leave a note on [[User_talk:Tmtoulouse|his talk page]] noting the block, stating the length of time, and explaining and justifying it. In this case, "Trolling, Abuse of power, Conspiracy to commit vandalism" are serious charges, and should be explained, with links to diffs showing examples of the problems.  

Despite his "Parthian shot" at Aschlafly, a six month time period is grotesquely excessive. This is not Willy on Wheels we're talking about. And this is someone with genuine expertise in biology and psychology.

It's reasonable to expect a sysop to spend a few minutes' time on an action as serious as this, and it should be explained publicly and openly to the community. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 09:04, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

Second, whenever you block a user you should ''always'' leave an explanation on his Talk page. When the charges are serious and the block is lengthy, this is especially important.  

P. S. I don't know what the details are, but there is a distinction between "tenacious point-of-view warring" and "vandalism." Point-of-view warring is continually inserting a personal point-of-view into an article after it has been shown that there is a clear community consensus against it. That's not vandalism. Vandalism is inserting vulgarities, crude remarks attacking Conservapedia, deliberately changing accurate facts to inaccurate ones, inserting parodies that caricature conservative points of view, moving articles to inappropriate new names, etc. I don't ''think'' Tmtoulouse has done that or encouraged anyone else to do that. If he has, you should provide diffs illustrating the behavior. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 09:11, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

P. S. Tenacious point-of-view warring is bad behavior, but it is not "vandalism." Point-of-view warring is continually inserting a personal point-of-view into an article after it has been shown that there is a clear community consensus against it. That's ''not'' vandalism. Vandalism is inserting vulgarities, crude remarks attacking Conservapedia, deliberately changing accurate facts to inaccurate ones, inserting parodies that caricature conservative points of view, moving articles to inappropriate new names, etc. I don't ''think'' Tmtoulouse has done that or encouraged anyone else to do that. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 14:42, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

:Also his only "vandalism" was on talk pages.  Surely that's insufficient.  He didn't even post to Andy's page after Andy told him not to.  Surely that indicates no ''mens rea'' to commit vandalism.  And, the reason - "conspiracy to commit vandalism, abuse of powers" - seriously?  That sounds like a reason to block Conservative, not a guy who was a sysop for all of two hours. -'''<font color="#007FFF">[[user:AmesG|Ames]]</font><font color="#FF0000">[[user talk:AmesG|G]]</font>''' 10:53, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

:Also his only "vandalism" was on talk pages.  Surely that's insufficient.  He didn't even post to Andy's page after Andy told him not to.  Surely that indicates no ''mens rea'' to commit vandalism.  And, the reason - "conspiracy to commit vandalism, abuse of powers" - seriously?  That sounds like a reason to block Conservative, not a guy who was a sysop for all of two hours. -'''<font color="#007FFF">[[user:AmesG|Ames]]</font><font color="#FF0000">[[user talk:AmesG|G]]</font>''' 10:53, 25 March 2007 (EDT)