(Note: This is what I got from the Talk page about the ban)

The core idea is, Wikipedia has internal mechanisms to make these kinds of notifications, and making these decisions needs some knowledge and experience about how Wikipedia works.

Recruiting inexperienced people to bias decisions which requires knowledge is effectively converting that proposal to a blunt instrument and trying to force your way in (aka bludgeon).

When the mechanisms in place and requirement of experience (i.e. competence), whistling the town square and calling people to force a gate is textbook brigading, and brigading is forbidden everywhere (maybe except 4chan/8chan).

▲

dotancohen 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Recruiting inexperienced people to bias decisions which requires knowledge is effectively converting that proposal to a blunt instrument and trying to force your way in (aka bludgeon).

I agree with your premise and with your conclusion. That said, campaigning in a democracy is exactly recruiting inexperienced people to bias decisions which requires knowledge. Any support of that viewpoint would effectively ban political campaigning.

▲

bayindirh 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's not my premise, and not my conclusion. This is a summary of what the admins talk on that discussion page. So I'm just a messenger summarizing things.

Moreover, Wikipedia is not a democracy [0]. It's a consensus based system. So, as they say, votes coming from outside doesn't count, and that's fine by me.

Last but not the least, this is a kind of decision on the level of law-making for the Wikipedia. People elect politicians, but don't write the laws themselves. Criticizing Wikipedia for not allowing "ordinary citizens" to write the laws is a bit stretch while giving democracy as an example to aspire to doesn't make sense, because even a democracy doesn't work the way you want to portray here.

Anyway, Wikipedia is not a democracy to begin with, so that's moot in a sense.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_no...

	▲	MichaelZuo a day ago \| parent [-]
		It clearly cannot be consensus based? As several users mentioned, “The Unblockables” are notorious, as only one admin willing to unblock them is sufficienf. Even against the wishes of another admin and many users.