User talk:Hoof Hearted: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Blocking: challenging
(→‎Blocking: challenging)
Line 454: Line 454:


I support [[YiFei]]'s assertion that blocking in this instance is too harsh and request that you unblock.  ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
I support [[YiFei]]'s assertion that blocking in this instance is too harsh and request that you unblock.  ~~ [[MarkDilley]]
:I wonder if in this type of instance, it might be better, instead of blocking right away, to either take the matter off-wiki to a synchronous, private communication method like Gmail chat, which can often be quite helpful for resolving conflicts; or for either the sysop or the user who has been threatened with a block to file a [[Request for Comment]] and see what others think. This user's style is blunt and combative, but he's not like the users whose behavior is such obvious vandalism that they can be blocked summarily and uncontroversially, or who cause such widespread havoc that they need to be blocked as an emergency measure. Also, it would be helpful if you could use a summary when blocking. Thanks. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
:I wonder if in this type of instance, it might be better, instead of blocking right away, to either take the matter off-wiki to a synchronous, private communication method like Gmail chat, which can often be quite helpful for resolving conflicts; or for either the sysop or the user who has been threatened with a block to file a [[Request for Comment]] and see what others think. This user's style is blunt and combative, but he's not like the users whose behavior is such obvious vandalism that they can be blocked summarily and uncontroversially, or who cause such widespread havoc that they need to be blocked as an emergency measure. Also, it would be helpful if you could use a summary when blocking. Thanks. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:25, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I would not call that 'blunt and combative' rather ''straight and challenging'' ;-) M.
Anonymous user

Navigation menu