On Apr 22, 2006, at 12:17 PM, Phil Sandifer wrote:
Amen to that.
Sadly (and to name names), a certain administrator
whose name begins with "T" and ends with "ony Sidaway" has, in the
past, been allowed to (and even congratulated for) reverting other
administrators' actions multiple times while the ruling culture
derides any criticism of this as "lynching".
Congratulations! Your skill at trolling has increased!
Congratulations! Your skill at thread derailment has increased!
Congratulations! Your skill at cliched personal attacks has increased!
Congratulations! You are now a level 2 Wiki-EN user!
Thanks for your most instructive reply. I see you conveniently
snipped out the entire point that this post was leading to, which I
will repeat thrice for emphasis, since you didn't seem to get it the
first time:
My point? Any prohibition against wheel warring must be *objective*
and *applied across the board*. Unless every case, without exception,
of violating any wheel-warring policy is met with immediate
desysopping (pending further review) then the wheel-warring policy
will be selectively enforced to enable certain administrators to
"win" wheel wars against unfavored administrators.
My point? Any prohibition against wheel warring must be *objective*
and *applied across the board*. Unless every case, without exception,
of violating any wheel-warring policy is met with immediate
desysopping (pending further review) then the wheel-warring policy
will be selectively enforced to enable certain administrators to
"win" wheel wars against unfavored administrators.
My point? Any prohibition against wheel warring must be *objective*
and *applied across the board*. Unless every case, without exception,
of violating any wheel-warring policy is met with immediate
desysopping (pending further review) then the wheel-warring policy
will be selectively enforced to enable certain administrators to
"win" wheel wars against unfavored administrators.
--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch