Board Thread:Wiki Discussions/@comment-7211845-20140111172933/@comment-24108837-20140118162036

I think anons who only trolled and vandalised (look at their history) can be blocked permanently and straight without notice. For others we shouldn't be too fast in doing it. Blocking or suspending is a kind of wikia capital punishment. It should be a last resort. I think we should not start with doing it or even threatening to do it. I would say we follow the following procedure:


 * notify the person (s)he did something wrong.
 * some things are not immediately clear. Like adding speculative information to pages or erroneous categories. Even threatening to ban in a case like that will be entirely counter productive.
 * spamming guild and friend code outside the designated areas should be considered bad (warn first ban later), but posting a guild more than once in the guild code area should not be immediately considered spamming. Just a note that the user is out of line (without a threat) may solve it if needed.
 * if there is mild trolling. Warn him/her
 * at some moment I just wrote on someone's wall that I was keeping an eye on his edits. Never seen him troll or vandalise again.
 * I can't ban and I can't threaten with that. That makes me feel rather comfortable.
 * (for admins) if you want to ban somebody (other than a very clear case of persistent vandalism) do not do it yourself but report the person in the issue threat. That ensures a second opinion.
 * Be lenient in general.
 * nobody on earth can know the entire truth. Sometimes edits that look erroneous at first glance can be valid after all. Sometimes people do a lot of trouble to add invalid content. I have to admit I have been too strict on a few occasions (when I was not even a rollback yet), with devastating results.

This is just my interpretation of the rules. Maybe we need a clear generally agreed upon ban policy.