On 1/24/06, Sam Fentress (Asbestos) asbestos999@gmail.com wrote:
There is nothing that we could discuss that we would need to ban others from listening to and contributing to. Policy? Nowhere is it written or even suggested that admins only make policy. Blocking decisions? This is always open on the wiki and admin decisions are always transparent and open to accountability. How to use admin buttons? Use a talk page, write an email, or go to #wikipedia. People we don't like? Edit wars we'd like assistance on? Notable polls we want our friends voting in? If people need to discuss any of these things, there are plenty of other venues.
This isn't a trivial matter. Outside of email lists, this is the first time (as far as I'm aware) that we have any forum designed specifically to hide from the rest of the community, to discuss things in secret, to set one group over and above another.
I'm not against an admin-oriented channel: just against a hidden, exclusive, admin-only channel.
Sam
Since no one else has mentioned this, I just thought I'd throw the question out again: Is there anything that we, as administrators, need to discuss that we'd need to ban others from listening to and contributing to?
If not, then I don't care about the odd benefit of being able to have "a quiet word with a group of trusted editors": the idea of a secret, exclusive channel needs to be thrown out. You can still have your quiet word on a moderated, on-topic, non-exclusive admin channel.
Sam
-- Asbestos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asbestos