"Ilmari Karonen" wrote
Anyway, your input and policymaking skills are appreciated. Let's get this thing done.
What 'thing'?
The thing that people seem to think about is rationing the use of admin powers. I'm against that.
If the basic issue is admins in conflict, who can't be bothered to discuss a difficult issue with each other as colleagues, then such proposals don't really solve that. I say that a lack of consultation, admin-to-admin, is a root cause of troubles. Simply imposing rationing doesn't address that.
What is more, I'm fundamentally against equating 'edit wars' and 'wheel wars'. From an ArbCom point of view, we handle edit wars very largely by ignoring content issues. We should not treat so-called 'wheel wars' in the same way. Admin actions are in protection of the project, and we need to look, very much, at what motivations and interpretations are behind them.
Recent ArbCom judgements show (I hope) some consistency in my approach. I don't want admins to have, in effect, fewer powers. I do want to treat lack of consultation with admin colleagues as very serious. And I would much prefer to have 1% of the current admins lose all their powers, for abuses, than have 100% of admins have restrictions placed on their discretion.
Charles