User talk:StonedChipmunk/Vandalism

Jcam's Response
It's good to see you've made it your personal mission to stop vandalism and I'm glad you are so energetic about it. A few thoughts (or perhaps constructive criticism), though: So, keep up the good work in fighting vandals. I do a lot of vandal fighting myself and am effective without drawing too much attention to fighting vandals, because that, in the long run, only encourages them and I'm here to make wikipedia a good reference tool, not to spend 'all my time here fighting vandalism.
 * I was once a vandal before I set up the account I currently use. I wasn't perhaps the worst case of a wiki-vandal, but I suppose I was blocked a couple dozen times. So I understand the vandal mentality, even though I haven't vandalised in the past couple of years (although I've been known to make a "cute" edit every couple of months or so). Thinking back to the old days, I can say that for me, the thrill wasn't the actual vandalism. Most vandals realize that their edits aren't going to last very long, For them, the thrill is the reaction to their vandalism. And then the counterstrike which may be something like placing an image of Adolf Hitler on the reverter's user page.
 * So after reading your page on vandalism, how would I have reacted had I seen it during "those days" ? I probably would have laughed and vandalised that page. And there are ways to circumvent a block (especially if one uses AOL or has a dynamic IP). And then I would have kept on vandalising it. So the mentality of let's react in a loud way is actually the very worst way of dealing with vandalism. I would have loved to see the flashing red siren on my talk page. It would have only encouraged me, not detered me. The test template you criticize ? That only bores vandals and they might just decide vandalism isn't very fun and move along.
 * Vandals know they did something wrong. You state: An image notifies the user has done something wrong and should read the message (color and visually pleasing images do catch readers' attention)." You miss the point. Attention is what the vandal craves. Going straight for a strong message on the first vandalism only increases the chances of repeated vandalism.
 * Keep in mind that the most important thing, the thing we're all here for (or should be here for) is building an encyclopedia. There will always be vandals. It goes with the territory. So we are building an encyclopedia and when it comes to vandalism, we either hope individual vandals get bored and leave or maybe (rarely) get them to stop vandalism and help build an encylopedia. Our efforts aren't meant to be punitive, but simply to do what's best for the enyclopedia. I would say that back in the day, it was the adminstrators who reacted to vandalism in the most extreme way ( the well known RickK was an example) who encouraged me to vandalise more.