Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Locke Cole/Workshop

Sam Korn, rather than further cluttering up the arbitration page I thought I'd discuss this with you here. I really can't see the basis for your position on 'edit warring' in 'proposed finding of fact 2'. You seem to be suggesting that if a user encounters a persistent vandal they should not get into an 'edit war' (which you say is "always" wrong) of reverting the vandalism, but rather search about for someone that the vandal "respects" enough to voluntarily stop vandalizing... even if 6+ admins have previously failed to get the person to stop. Note, that this isn't just some wild hypothetical... WP:VAND includes intentional violation of copyright policy as a form of vandalism... making the above an accurate description of this case. There are exceptions to the 3RR rule precisely because edit warring is not "always" wrong. When someone is clearly violating policy you should revert them... indeed WP:CV and WP:VAND say so explicitly. If that isn't the case then the exceptions to 3RR should be removed and we can all observe how effective convincing persistent policy violators to voluntarily comply will be. The idea that people shouldn't remove a policy violation if they suspect the person will repeat it also strikes me as bizarre. It starts by assuming bad faith and ends by rewarding persistent policy violation... we only correct violations if we think the user will not repeat them. The really dedicated violators we leave alone until we can find someone they respect. BTW, my cynical side might suggest that Netoholic's eventual capitualation on this issue could have had more to do with discussion on AN/I about blocking him over it than it did with his having more 'respect' for Wgfinley than the numerous people who had previously asked him to stop. In any case, 'hunt around for someone the person respects enough to follow the rules' does not strike me as a sound policy. Netoholic should have respected all of the people who talked to him about this... and the copyright policies themselves for that matter. Not respecting other users shouldn't be an excuse for getting away with violating Wikipedia policy. --CBDunkerson 18:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)