| Revision as of 19:14, 6 November 2022 editNigel Ish (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers76,867 edits As discussion on ANI actually does definately wants to forbid me from commenting anywhere or editingTag: Reverted← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:37, 7 November 2022 edit undoNigel Ish (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers76,867 editsNo edit summaryTag: RevertedNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| It is clear from discussions on ANI that certain editors feel strongly that WP:NPA does not apply to a group of superusers, and that no-one should be allowed to |
It is clear from discussions on ANI that certain editors feel strongly that WP:NPA does not apply to a group of superusers, and that no-one should be allowed to criticise them - and that anyone who does should be thrown out of here. It is also very clear that certain editors have decided that I am to have no rights to say anything. Why they object so strongly to any sort of civility is unknown | ||
| Fundamentally the elevation of DTTR to policy means that editors cannot be warned of behaviour that is problematic on their talk pages as all the templates do is package such warnings in a consistent manner. It is the message that disruptive editors object to, not the packaging. As there are procedures that require the use of templated warnings - i.e. copyvio and edit warring, where action is often not taken unless an appropriate number of warnings have been left, then these procedures cannot be enforced. It is clear that such issues are not important to those who hang out at ANI. | |||
| With discussion of behaviour issues on the editor's talk pages prohibited, that leaves ANI - but as the same editors who prohibit the use of warnings also attack people who raise issues at ANI, then ANI itself is useless. Where then can someone go? T&S? | |||
Revision as of 17:37, 7 November 2022
It is clear from discussions on ANI that certain editors feel strongly that WP:NPA does not apply to a group of superusers, and that no-one should be allowed to criticise them - and that anyone who does should be thrown out of here. It is also very clear that certain editors have decided that I am to have no rights to say anything. Why they object so strongly to any sort of civility is unknown
Fundamentally the elevation of DTTR to policy means that editors cannot be warned of behaviour that is problematic on their talk pages as all the templates do is package such warnings in a consistent manner. It is the message that disruptive editors object to, not the packaging. As there are procedures that require the use of templated warnings - i.e. copyvio and edit warring, where action is often not taken unless an appropriate number of warnings have been left, then these procedures cannot be enforced. It is clear that such issues are not important to those who hang out at ANI.
With discussion of behaviour issues on the editor's talk pages prohibited, that leaves ANI - but as the same editors who prohibit the use of warnings also attack people who raise issues at ANI, then ANI itself is useless. Where then can someone go? T&S?