I requested bureaucratship on the Request for Admins page, and I noticed that a few people voted to oppose -- all for basically the same reason. I'm too hasty and unilateral.
James wrote (there):
<< Oppose because of the unilateral ban of Wik less than 7 days before this and the writing above saying he isn't a unilateralist, suggesting a lack of recognition of his own tendency to act in haste. Also because he continues to advocate unilateral banning on the mailing list. Ed, please at least be consistent in your opposition to unilateralism, through your deeds as well as your words in all places, not just this page. Once you are, I'll support this. Until then, I don't think you're recognising how you really act.>>
Okay, I'm officially going on record as saying that I completely oppose unilateral bans. If it's not an emergency or a clear-cut, utterly unambiguous example of "pure vandalism", then the admin should not click the temp-ban link.
We're supposed to have all agreed on a formal and transparent procedure, i.e., the Mediation and Arbitration committees.
I've been monitoring the temp-ban page ever since I realized I was wrong to apply a unilateral ban to Wik. (BTW, thanks to Caroline and James for gently awakening me to the error of my ways.) I un-banned one other user whose "case" slipped by the committees; and no one saw fit to re-ban him, either.
Let's all avoid unilateral bans, starting with me. I can't make this any clearer.
Ed Poor