Gregory Maxwell wrote:
The claim you are referring to made is that only if
users are bad
admins are pissed, not if and only if.
I'm sorry, this sentence does not parse grammatically. Please rephrase? :)
I omitted 'being' before made.
Your (2) is effectively: Only if users are bad admins are pissed
"Only if" is the converse of "if", right? So the above statement
means:
"If admins are annoyed [at a user], then that user has been bad". This
is the argument that is often used here to justify discriminating
behaviour against a newbie.
It seemed to me that you were reading (2) as : If and
only if users
are bad admins are pissed.
No, I'm not. You are thinking of the converse of the above, which is:
"If a user has been bad, then admins get annoyed at that user"
but I am actually saying that (2) implies that
"If users gets annoyed at the admins, then the admins have been bad"
which is a consequence of (2) and the fact that both users and admins
are human beings.
Does it? Are
you alleging that all or most annoyed people speak up? I
don't think so.
No, I'm claiming that we have a lot of users and that you've failed to
make any attempt to demonstrate that the level of complaint we are
seeing is significant.
Okay -- by that argument, invidivual admins are quick to block and ban
users who they are unhappy about, without making any attempt to
demonstrate that the other admins' level of unhappiness about the user
is significant.
I am quite sure that mistakes are made... and that we
even have a few
low quality admins. ... But I've seen no information which causes me
to believe that this should be considered a high priority problem
You'd rather continue to have this flurry of angry complaints on this
mailing list? :)
They don't bother me. You can always unsubscribe if they bother you.
Please don't stray away from the argument. Unsubscribing does not make
them go away -- the users would still get annoyed at the admins, and
would still complain. I am not bothered by the fact that I *see* the
complaints, but about the fact that users are generally unhappy about
the admins and their behaviour towards them.
How else could I respond? Even if everything were
perfect we'd still
get complaints...
Didn't you notice that the complaints we receive are almost all
complaining about the same thing (namely, admin abuse)? Didn't you
notice that almost all of them complain that the admins do not follow
the policies they claim to value so much? They are not random complaints
about random things. They are about one very specific issue.
Now if you actually think that the complaints are
evidence of
something that needs improvment, please provide evidence...
The complaining users have already done that numerous times. All of that
evidence is usually brushed under the rug, and the topic changed to
collecting evidence of that user's own wrong-doing (the "tu quoque"
fallacy). I get the impression that the percentage of people on this
mailing list who take any of those evidence-presenting complaints
seriously is alarmingly low.
Timwi