(UTC) The key question is whether a blocked user can still use it, and I don't think it's of any use to a blocked user. In general, we should focus on supporting new editors, not disparaging them. Rs chen 7754 18:13, (UTC) Of course. They discovered later that it was a long time in the making, and One had helped foster the 001 project just to meet this end. (This is not a live feature, but it can be seen in the sandbox version here.) I can't think of any drawbacks.
TonyBallioni ( talk ) 19:18, (UTC) @ TonyBallioni : how is it pointless to give easier access to resources to editors and reviewers? Items too, right out of their cells. Sorting this out will take forever and involve huge amounts of work - with very many wrong links sitting there indefinitely. If we are going to automate it, it should be similar to the way hostbot operates. GMG talk 14:19, (UTC) @ GreenMeansGo : Drafts have a very temporary life shelf and is dominated by newcomers, rather than Illustrious Looshpahs. I think you mean the exact opposite of what you have written. But that's a separate concern, which you can bring at Template talk:Draft article. I wonder if he thinks it was worth. Forcing it upon everyone unless they explicitly opt-out also seems like a great example of WP:creep. I've blocked a number of sockpuppet accounts which had managed to deceptively obtain advanced permissions, but I've never removed them, because they're blocked and can't use them. But how can an ED assess the effectiveness of the grants effort, evaluate proposal writing, evaluate grant management, and effectively cope with the strings attached to grant awards? (or this may already exist?).