Admins are only taken to arbcom by other admins.
Welcome to the basic problem: in zeal to "protect admins from harassment by trolls" we've made it nearly impossible for a normal user, being abused by an admin, to protest. Protesting on your talk page leads to being blocked for "incivility", leads to the admin's friends removing your unblock request or just denying it, and by the time it goes up to Arbcom, what you have is not a record of an admin who is pursuing a user, but rather a record of someone who "has consistently been blocked by multiple admins for incivility and vandalism and is trying to file an RFA to harass an admin."
The most egregious account I've seen was brought to us a few days ago, where an admin blocked a user and then tag-teamed with a non-admin to repeatedly remove the user's unblock requests, and finally got a third party to lock the user's talk page for "unblock abuse."
I call that abusive. I know David came up with the red herring that the reporter is "enviroknot", but I don't care who brought it up: that is abusive behavior.
On 10/6/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/10/06, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
Because, by design of the system, no arbcom case can ever be brought,
and
even if it were, arbcom is FIRMLY on the side of the admin every time.
Think
about it. In order to bring a case to arbcom, you have to (A) be the aggrieved party, (B) have someone else sign on to the case at least
twice
(you have to RFC beforehand or arbcom will just dismiss it), and (C) be
a
"user in good standing."
Admins are never taken to arbcom? Admins are never deadminned? Welcome to 2006 where this is not the case.
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l