Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
Rick wrote:
Since I was involved in the redirecting and reverting, I was not allowed to protect the page, much as I would have liked to.
I detect an anomaly or contradiction in our policies. An admin is not allowed to get into a fight with a user over the content of a page and then protect the page, but the admin *is* allowed to block that user after having fought with them?
I offer no solution to this; I just pose it as a problem.
I didn't think we had such an anomaly. It comes as quite a surprise to me that a party to a dispute is supposedly allowed to ban his or her opponent in the dispute. Generally using sysop powers for personal disputes is considered a misuse of power, for the exact same reasons protecting a page is. Similarly, arbitration committee members recuse themselves from cases involving users with whom they've had disputes. Certainly if there's enough of an involvement that protecting a page would be inappropriate, banning the user would be highly inappropriate, not to mention quite unseemly.
-Mark