Perhaps we need a new system to take the place of RFC in cases like this - a Motions to Censure (MTC) page where anyone can take reports of misuse of admin tools (I would at least start it as only for admins, but if it goes well it could be expanded to problems with anyone).
I think CN could work well for this sort of thing, but something should be done about RfC, too.
Is CN really much different to RfC? The main point of my idea is that there is a definite closing time and a definite result (even though that result has no direct effect on anything).
There is an argument for only allowing admins to !vote. It would carry more weight if it's admins keeping control of each other, and it would stop people trying to censure admins every time they protect the wrong version.
This would never work, they're too busy protecting eachother. This isn't a cabalism thing, but a simple fact that, unless it's egregious abuse, you'll likely have enough friends to stop by and stand up for you even if you were completely off track. I've seen it happen too many times at this point.
If it was just admins, then I was thinking it should only require a simple majority to pass. As long as there are enough admins contributing to the process I don't think friends stopping by would be enough.