Talk:Project grants/Taser
I'm not certain you are being specific enough with your targets. Can you provide a ball-park figure for how many taserings you expect will be required each month? Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 14:53, 1 April 2014 (BST)
- Perhaps target practice should be built into the proposal? Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 15:40, 1 April 2014 (BST)
I'd argue that some volunteers already have access to tasers as well as other non-lethal weapons. If there is existing equipment available then that should be used before any significant expenditure can be justified.--Stuart Prior (WMUK) (talk) 14:56, 1 April 2014 (BST)
I'm sorry to burst the bubble, but have you done a full cost / benefit analysis that leads you to believe that a taser would be more effective than, say, CS gas or a water cannon? Can you also show that the taser (or other non-deadly weapon) will be used collaboratively? Stevie Benton (WMUK) (talk) 15:14, 1 April 2014 (BST)
- Correct use of a taser requires at least two people, the taserer and the taseree. Many models of taser allow a skilled operator to taser two people at the same time (when they are standing sufficiently close to each other). In this respect I think it is sufficiently collaborative. While a water cannon is more collaborative in this respect, I'm not sure that being seen to be using that much water would be a good thing for the charity's environmental credentials. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 16:18, 1 April 2014 (BST)
- Sorry to pour cold water on the suggestion, but we need to be practical here; Usually when admins need to take action they are awake and sober and dealing with someone in a completely different timezone who has rolled in from the pub after a night out. So what we really need is a device that can be pointed at an IP address from the other side of the world and deliver a sufficient EMP to stop any computers in the vicinity. Jonathan Cardy (WMUK) (talk) 17:36, 1 April 2014 (BST)
Endorsements
- Community member: add your name and rationale here.
- Katherine Bavage As everyone knows I'm in favour of violence as a rule. Perhaps we can explore offering miscreants the chance to makes a donation instead of being tasered? Obviously we would taser them irregardless.
- Mike Peel (talk) Although it might be more elegant to focus on tech work to create a virus that can be sent to vandals' laptops and cause them to give the vandal an electric shock. Or maybe we should just learn to love the east Germanic tribe and embrace multi-species wiki projects.
- I believe this should be highly valuable as a teaching aid for paid editors about likely issues they can expect when adding to the sum of human knowledge on our projects without making declarations at every possible opportunity. An "I edit for cash, I do not stun easily" userbox might be a pragmatic part of its implementation. --Fæ (talk) 23:09, 1 April 2014 (BST)