James Forrester wrote:
On 3 October 2011 15:37, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikipedian@gmail.com wrote:
Wait, so someone pulling [[WP:DICK]] on someone else is something I can take to Arbcom? Arbcom is gonna be pretty busy if I start reporting every time I see it done....and I can't see it going very far with Arbcom or with AN/I....considering how many people back it as one of the "three most important principles of Wikipedia"-- which I disagree with entirely....
When we founded ArbCom it was entirely with user disputes in mind. I'd be disappointed and surprised if poor user behaviour wasn't dealt with by the current Committee, but if you don't do anything about it and call people on their poor behaviour when you see it, it'll never improve.
J.
That's an entirely different proposition from merely being vindictive for its own sake, which seems to be the current modus operandi of ArbCom. "Calling people on their poor behaviour" may be a function of ArbCom, but only when all other avenues have been exhausted, including RfC, and only when there is no plausible route to rehabilitation, including (but not limited to) friendly advice, a break from adminning to recover from the stress (which, to be honest, might well include death threatson one's own Talk page), or even a temporary desysop in the interests of the admin. Tell me, when did ArbCom last take that position, and actually realise that volunteering to improve Wikipedia, whether by adding content, or dealing with vandalism, or otherwise applying WP policies, is to be appreciated rather than castigated? Clue:Never, in my experience, and certainly not recently. ArbCom is a ramshackle, unaccountable shed, which should be torn down and rebuilt from scratch, if not cast permanently into the "not fit for purpose" dustbin. It's a disgrace as it is now.