Peter Mackay wrote:
I can't say that I care much about the nuts and bolts of anyone else's
disputes, but to be fair, when someone comes along here, gets treated
unfairly and unjustly and finds that this applies all the way up, they feel
entitled to have a complain about it.
The crowning irony is that nobody cares about the complaint. The relevant
admins and Arbcom reckon they have done their job, and besides they have
plenty of other work to get on with, and just about everyone else assumes
that the ArbCom have worked through the issue and the complaint is
unjustified.
The thing is that very little about Wikipedia's social government conforms
to the standards one might expect from a real-world justice system or
national government. We're somewhere else.
I'm not saying that the system is a total shambles, just that it's patchy.
Much like WP itself. Some bits are really really good, some are OK, others
need work and others suck.
And the complaints that make their way here aren't from vandals. We can
recognise vandalism and act upon it swiftly.
Peter (Skyring)
Bingo. We're not a social experiment -- we're trying to build an
encyclopedia. I don't see any encyclopedia projects running themselves
like a real justice system or national government. Wikipedia does not
exist to mete out justice to people who try to edit it. Nobody has an
innate right to edit Wikipedia or be done justice by other people who
edit it.
John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])