Steve Summit wrote:
Stephen Bain wrote:
Calling someone "abusive" is still an ad hominem statement. Rather than saying "Admin X is abusive!1!" the person should say...
Indeed he should. But this is also at the heart of one of the rather disturbing asymmetries in the admin/non-admin relationship.
Absolutely. It's in the nature of holding superior power not to see that one is so much more powerful.
When a non-admin engaged in a petty dispute complains about some of the things being said about him in that dispute, he's often told, in so many words, not to take it so personally, to get a thicker skin, that Wikipedia can be a harsh place, that if he can't stand the heat this kitchen might not be the place for him.
But when a non-admin engaged in a petty dispute with an admin calls the admin "abusive", or in a moment of anger refers to the admin's revertions of the non-admin's petty edits as "vandalism", he's apt to be blocked for this abuse.
Even more important is the unwillingness of an admin to enter into a dialogue. Perhaps the point was discussed two years ago, but the present editor was not part of that discussion which may now be buried deep in the archives. The arguments may seem repetitious to the admin, but they are entirely new to the editor. The question then becomes how do we respect the views of a new person about an issue which was previously considered to be long closed.
"Abuse of power", which may be what is often meant by "admin abuse", means taking advantage of your superior power, status or experience as the basis for winning a difference of opinion. Admins have friends in the Project; without them they would not be admins. They can easily call on an available friend to add the extra power needed to win an argument; some would even see that as abusive. The non-admin may not have had the time to develop a circle of friends, and is easily frustrated by the tactics of the admins; he easily falls afoul of established rules that he does not understand. He comes here looking for an advocate who could perhaps mediate the problem. We do have a mediation system (I think), but he may not be fully aware of how it operates.
Steve is talking about systemic issues, and systemic issues are only rarely imposed systematically. Inequalities of power are systemic because mos people who abuse such powers do not realize that they are doing so, and will honestly deny that it is happening.
Ec