• I don't know if you knew the blocking policy was official when you blocked HippoHead, as you had not yet responded to my notification that the blocking policies were official now. However, you blocked Renee kelly AFTER you acknowledged my message that the blocking policy was official. You need to COMMUNICATE with users, especially since both appear to be new users. You didn't even ask either of them to explain their edits and tell them that they cannot make edits like they did. You just simply blocked them. The policies are:

    Blocking policies:

    C1 - "Any user who violates any rule will be given (a) warning(s) on their message wall before they are blocked."

    C2 - "Administrators that find a user violating any of the policies must revert any changes and must politely notify the user of their wrongdoing."

    B2 - "Administrators must follow the established blocking policy. Any exceptions require a community discussion."

    B3 - "Any administrator who fails to follow the blocking procedures after three (3) warnings from a bureaucrat will be suspended for seven (7) days, pending discussion on the administrator's user rights."

    That's one warning. It's better to communicate with people than to just block them. By communicating with users, they can either learn and move on and make better edits, or if they defend their wrong edits, you can tell them why they are wrong. If they revert the page, they are breaking a rule. If they harass you, that is another breaking of the rules. It will all depend on how they respond to your warning. It's better to give them a chance than scare them off.

    Per B3 of the blocking policy, consider this your first warning. Of course if you have further issues with the blocking of Renee kelly and you could request a community discussion regarding the specific block per B2.

      Loading editor
    • I gave them two hour blocks.

      How many times do I need to tell you, I am not going to follow those rules! I have changed my rules to a reasonable amount and I still think that you did not NEED to make those rules.

        Loading editor
    • Also, At least I RESPOND. Seriously, you don't respond to some of the things that I send you. Why are you not responding to the checklist message on your wall?

        Loading editor
    • You know what, I change my mind. I will message users before blocking him or her. But, the first time I get a response that is negative/unreasonable, I will stop messaging people.

        Loading editor
    • Some times I miss messages. If I do, let me know and I will find it. And if someone gives a negative response, that is considered breaking another rule (see the user conduct section of the policies). I proposed this policy in the first place to protect new and inexperience users from being scared away. That's it. That's why. And if you say we don't NEED the blocking policy, why was there no opposition to the policy? Why are some users afraid to be blocked by you?

        Loading editor
    • First, I did tell you on the "Blocking policy" thread. 

      Second, the my position on that thread was my opposition.

      Third, they were afraid because of my behavior before, but I have changed now.

        Loading editor
    • "But, the first time I get a response that is negative/unreasonable, I will stop messaging people."

      That would be an awful policy. All users are different. Just because one person is negative or unreasonable doesn't mean the next person who is warned will be. You cannot punish someone with no warning because someone was negative after they were given a warning.

        Loading editor
    • okay, then I will not warn the users that give me bad (being the type that is negative, not something that I don't like) responses.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message