User talk:DMorris/Blocking Proposal

User:JamesWilson's Feedback

I don't know about mimicking Wikipedia's blocking policies. They are (somewhat) effective for Wikipedia, but they wouldn't seem to be practical here. I mean, giving three warnings for blatant vandalism? That doesn't seem to be at all practical in dealing with people who are just here to cause trouble. And about malicious vandalism, do you want the same warnings or a block?

Also, what exactly is an abuse report? Excuse my incompetence, but I am not familiar with the term. .--JamesWilson 12:04, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

At a sysop's descretion, we could give just one warning before blocking in cases of blatant vandalism, just as Wikipedia does. We need to take a lesson in assuming good faith if we want to improve our user base.

An abuse report is a complaint submitted to an ISP or IT department about something bad on the Internet, like wiki vandalism. Karajou and I have been finding success in dealing with trolls in this way. JPatt has also witnessed the effectiveness. DMorris 20:35, 17 August 2011 (EDT)

I suppose you're right about assuming good faith. I've just noticed Wikipedia doling out multiple warnings to users who are obviously not there to help their site, and that's why I made that comment. And thanks for telling me what that was. Thanks!--JamesWilson 20:40, 17 August 2011 (EDT)