Board Thread:Administrative/@comment-1713281-20130730145643/@comment-3406131-20150629163621

Mrkermit wrote: I really like the term "Laissez-faire users" which describes the situation perfectly. I also think that a block of a few days is many times the only way to get their attention. However, I don't think that mandatory answering could or should be in the rules. Although I understand that it's almost impossible to be a good editor without discussing things, member can still be valuable if he understands the rules. I see the blocking as a way to protect our site from unwanted edits and if a user don't respond and keeps violating our policies, what else could be done. Of course it's important to phrase the message with a block so that they understand that it's not for punishment and they are welcomed back as soon as they acknowledge the rules. That lessens the drama involving the blocks and keeps our site more newcomer friendly. And if a user don't respond and keeps doing "his/her thing" after the initial block, or if a user tells that the rules don't apply to him, no matter how "valuable" or experienced that user is, block has to be infinite.

Things get muddier if the user promises that the edits will be within policies but still don't do that. I guess it has to be case-by-case basis. It would be great if our discussion could be turned into a dedicated forum thread open to all members and a written blocking policy. I'm too inexperienced and have too little interest at the moment to lead that, but as a new admin, I really could use one. The problem is most of the bad editors (that's not nice, but that's a fact) does not reply. The others reply, consult others... The "mandatory" response is not much of a rule in my mind, but more of a basic courtesy, a simple respect from users to users.