"::::Well, first, I'm not saying  is a good solution, I'm saying it's better than . A good solution would be to not use templates on likely good faith users at all, and to ask them to get a rename rather than block them first, and politely explains about COI and CSD#A7 and all. 
 ::::Here is what  says (sorry, can't figure out a way to make it format neatly):  
 ::::Here is what  says:  
 ::::The difference is showing them respect, and not throwing red X's at them, and not making them beg, and not automatically assuming it is spam (which implies bad intent), vs. didn't-know-any-better promotion.  One is more likely to result in good faith editors sticking around, one is more likely to lead to good faith editors saying ""OK, well fuck Wikipedia, then"". It's easy enough to block them if they continue to promote, and if not, we may have gained an editor, and (more importantly) we have treated someone with more respect. And for obviously bad faith spammers, you can keep on as you've been doing and I won't care.  It's the unwillingness to try to differentiate between good faith editors and bad faith editors, to assume the best until shown otherwise, that bothers me.    
 "