> I don't know what you expect, Björn, but a certain degree of
> protection is needed for anyone who's been submitted to an arbcom
> complaint. We can't just let anyone accuse someone without the arbcom
> being given evidence of the violations in question.
I think that is unrelated to the fact that The System, as it currently
is constructed, does not work for an editor being harassed by an
admin. Besides, there is ample evidence in the diffs. Evidence that
has been collected and also ignored.
> Secondly, a lot of users go straight onto the attack of a blocking or
> reverting admin while simply asking to undo their actions or asking
> for an explanation would be much more helpful.
Very true - many admins exploit that fact. Some admin blocks a user,
that user comes back in another form and sprouts insults around
him/her, the admin can then defend its decision by the bad behaviour
the user exhibited IN REPSONSE to the harassment. But the fact you
mention is not really pertinent and can not defend bad actions from
admins.
> Also, you can't expect admins to be infallible all the time. I've made
> some bad decisions, but I've always been open to discussion.
I don't "expect" that. :) I know that each and every sysop is about
100 times more secure in their position than the average user because
of admin cameradiereship (sp?). But I would have very much preferred a
system in which one bad decision is enough. If one admin goes down,
there is 100 other users to replace him/her.
> BTW Arbcom complaints don't need to be signed by someone else, that RFCs.
I didn't know that. Has it changed recently? Last time I checked the
procedure was exactly as I described. I even witnessed first-hand a
user trying the ArbCom route and failing because he/she could not get
a second user involved in the dispute to back him/her up. Which wasn't
very strange because there really only was he/she and the admin
involved..
I must also add so I don't offend someone to much. I think that even
if you replaced all misbehaving cowboy-sysops with good well-behaved
ones, nothing would change. Why? Because it's the System man, the
System!
--
mvh Björn