[WikiEN-l] Civility poll results

[Emily Monroe]

>  I think that part of the reluctance to confront abusive admins is  
> the "but we don't want to kick them out of being an admin over this".

Yeah, and in the meantime, the admin is swinging xyr power around.  
Even if the xyr isn't doing this explicitly, people are *that more*  
afraid to confront xym because "What if I get blocked for it?"

> AGF doesn't mutually exclude someone who clearly wants the best for  
> Wikipedia but is expressing that in an abusive manner.

Let me use a possibly bad analogy. Some abusive parents want the best  
for their children. They're still abusive, and child abuse is still  
unacceptable.

We shouldn't accept abusive behavior. The ends don't always justify  
the means.

> I've warned admins for abusive behavior.

Good for you.

Emily
On Aug 12, 2009, at 5:15 PM, George Herbert wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Emily Monroe<bluecaliocean at me.com>  
> wrote:
>> Hmm. What about somebody who has privileges?
>>
>> Clearly somebody who has non-admin rollback (like myself) may or may
>> not have it removed. It would depend if the person being incivil is
>> using the rollback to be incivil. Non-admin rollback is a position of
>> trust, but not a lot of trust.
>>
>> An admin, steward, or bureaucrat, on the other hand, may have their
>> privileges taken away. If you are in such a position, you're in a
>> position of not just trust, but *trust*. Incivility takes away that
>> trust.
>>
>> People may disagree with me, though. I get that.
>
> I think the people who ask to be stewards or bureaucrats seem to be
> unlikely to offend; they seem to be the stablest of us.
>
> Admins not necessarily so.  I think that part of the reluctance to
> confront abusive admins is the "but we don't want to kick them out of
> being an admin over this".
>
> Except that a civility warning, even a civility block, don't equate to
> admin rights removal.  Arbcom can remove those - Stewards or B'crats
> in an emergency.  The user could resign the rights.  But just being
> blocked for normal behavior (not admin bit abuses) doesn't trigger any
> of those automatically.
>
> It's easier to maintain AGF on an admin who I know and has been around
> for a while (and generally, for experienced users), but AGF doesn't
> mutually exclude someone who clearly wants the best for Wikipedia but
> is expressing that in an abusive manner.
>
> I've warned admins for abusive behavior.  Nothing bad has happened as
> a result.  I think it's acceptable to the community.
>
>
> -- 
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l