| Revision as of 21:17, 5 June 2022 editBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,275 edits clearer, perhaps← Previous edit |
Revision as of 17:03, 14 November 2022 edit undoDefThree (talk | contribs)480 edits →topTag: RevertedNext edit → |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Nutshell| The glass is always ].|shortcut=WP:OGTW}} |
|
{{Nutshell| The glass is always ].|shortcut=WP:OGTW}} |
|
{{bare anchored list |
|
{{bare anchored list |
|
|Frequent references to ] are a sure sign a user is in good faith. |
|
|Frequent references to ] are a sure sign a user is acting in good faith and assuming the good faith of others. |
|
|Frequent references to ] are a sure sign a user cares deeply about politeness and are themselves very courteous. |
|
|Frequent references to ] are a sure sign a user cares deeply about politeness and are themselves very courteous. |
|
|If a person edits Misplaced Pages largely or solely to promote one side of a contentious issue, they're likely to have spent years of their life studying it. Therefore they're almost certainly an asset to the project. |
|
|If a person edits Misplaced Pages largely or solely to promote one side of a contentious issue, they're likely to have spent years of their life studying it. Therefore they're almost certainly an asset to the project. |
| Line 8: |
Line 8: |
|
|When people insist that before blocked users can be unblocked, they must apologise, admit their mistakes, agree to learn to avoid previous pitfalls, work to address all of the issues, pave the road, seek redemption, face the music, show that they understand why exactly they were blocked and how right it was that they should be, or show remorse, it's probably not because the insister would like to see a ] or ].<ref></ref> More likely they have some psychiatric training and know how important it is to resolve conflicts and seek reconciliation, and how much better the delinquent would feel afterwards.<!-- Users who go a step further and counsel that the blockees had better physically put ashes on their heads and offer a pound of flesh may be motivated by knowledge of the time-attested efficacy of these traditional/religious rituals to enter deep into the soul and lift up those who are racked by remorse (or who ''ought''at least to be racked by remorse if they knew what was good for them). Neither has the old Wild West method of dealing with malefactors through the tarring, feathering, and run out of town on a rail method been completely discontinued. It should be remembered that such robust olden-days techniques for getting rid of ] malefactors were based on some sound common sense.--> |
|
|When people insist that before blocked users can be unblocked, they must apologise, admit their mistakes, agree to learn to avoid previous pitfalls, work to address all of the issues, pave the road, seek redemption, face the music, show that they understand why exactly they were blocked and how right it was that they should be, or show remorse, it's probably not because the insister would like to see a ] or ].<ref></ref> More likely they have some psychiatric training and know how important it is to resolve conflicts and seek reconciliation, and how much better the delinquent would feel afterwards.<!-- Users who go a step further and counsel that the blockees had better physically put ashes on their heads and offer a pound of flesh may be motivated by knowledge of the time-attested efficacy of these traditional/religious rituals to enter deep into the soul and lift up those who are racked by remorse (or who ''ought''at least to be racked by remorse if they knew what was good for them). Neither has the old Wild West method of dealing with malefactors through the tarring, feathering, and run out of town on a rail method been completely discontinued. It should be remembered that such robust olden-days techniques for getting rid of ] malefactors were based on some sound common sense.--> |
|
|The use of ] in a discussion simply means the user wants to give somebody a second chance, not that they enjoy invoking violent metaphors or are out to ambush somebody. |
|
|The use of ] in a discussion simply means the user wants to give somebody a second chance, not that they enjoy invoking violent metaphors or are out to ambush somebody. |
|
|The use of ] in a discussion means the user didn't want to bore the reader with all the good arguments they could have added. |
|
|The use of ] in a discussion means the user didn't want to bore the reader with all the good arguments they could have added. |
|
|The use of ] in a discussion doesn't mean the user is all out of real arguments for the version they prefer, it simply means… hmm. Working on that one. |
|
|The use of ] in a discussion doesn't mean the user is all out of real arguments for the version they prefer, it simply means… hmm. Working on that one. |
|
|It's good to add a touch of humour to discussions that are threatening to get heated. For instance, references to ] will make everybody laugh, thus defusing bad situations. |
|
|It's good to add a touch of humour to discussions that are threatening to get heated. For instance, references to ] will make everybody laugh, thus defusing bad situations. |
