nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
26,487
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 26:
Line 26: +
MediaWiki talk:Ipbreason-dropdown (view source)
Revision as of 22:39, April 30, 2009
, 22:39, April 30, 2009→Recent undo
:Exactly, Karajou. [[User:Jallen|Jallen]] 18:28, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
:Exactly, Karajou. [[User:Jallen|Jallen]] 18:28, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
::Well, I think there isn't a dispute here. So long as the blocking reasons are not cleansed for the deceitful reason of political correctness, all is good. I didn't add half of the entries, so we need to try and remember it was other Admins who did....and the reason for the pull-down is to help make it easier, so we don't have to type repetitive entries, right? --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 18:33, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
::Well, I think there isn't a dispute here. So long as the blocking reasons are not cleansed for the deceitful reason of political correctness, all is good. I didn't add half of the entries, so we need to try and remember it was other Admins who did....and the reason for the pull-down is to help make it easier, so we don't have to type repetitive entries, right? --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 18:33, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
:::'''Afterthought:''' The reasons many were added, we need to remember this, is because users were complaining they couldn't even discern why they were blocked, so it was decided by Andy to make the reasons clearer, more concise. If we trim too many reasons, we are back where we were; obtuse generalities that little reflect the true blocking reasons. I mean we could say for 75% of the blocks, "Violation of CP Commandments and/or Guidelines".....which gives little specificity, leaving the blocked user clueless as to the reason. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 18:39, 30 April 2009 (EDT)