Resid Gulerdem wrote:
After my message ([[WP:OURS]] - A proposal for admin-user relations - below) the link to the updated version of another proposal [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]] under my old user page is deleted for ''the good of Wikipedia''. I thought I should provide the ones who would like to see that proposal with the correct link. Earlier version can be found at [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]]. It is tag'ed as 'rejected' but the truth is, I could never find an opportunity to put it to a vote properly. I also copy pasted the updated version below this message for the sake of completeness and for your convenience.
Raphael wrote:
Fortunately I've made a backup of your last version here [[User:Raphael1/Wikiethics]] though I am not sure whether some administrator will censor this too.
Resid Gulerdem wrote:
Dear Raphael, That is very kind of you. I do appreciate for it. It will be a humble contribution of mine to the Wiki community if it has a chance to be discussed fairly in the future.
<snip/>
I would appreciate if you could let me know what you think about the proposals [[WP:OURS]] (and [[WP:Wikiethics]] about which you made some suggestions before) if possible. Realizing that there is a problem and identifying it is one thing, trying to find a reasonable solution to the problem is another thing. I think only talking about the problem does not lead the project to a better place and will not do any good other than increase frustration. Best, Resid
Dear Resid,
unfortunately now even my copy of your latest version of Wikiethics got deleted. I've filed a Deletion review, but it seems like some admins are already at a point, where they completely disregard any policy and act as one thinks best.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#User:Raphael1.2FWikie...
I truely appreciate your efforts to try to find a reasonable solution to the problem. But I doubt, that those in power, who would have to allow such a proposal to be discussed and passed, are already too detached from the consequences of their "might makes right" mentality to even realize the problem, and will use all possible means to make it fail.
Beside those addressed in [[WP:OURS]] I see multiple problems:
RfCs seem to be some kind of sympathy contests, where admins get the possibility to defend each other. It seems to be an important place for admins to improve their social standing. Allegations are not taken seriously, instead the accused party can simply claim to follow policies "in spirit" and accuse the nominating editor of Wikilaywering.
The way Wikipedia implements voting generally increases peer pressure. Even though it would include some technical work, Wikipedia desperately needs _anonymous_ voting. Editors with weak personalities tend to use the possibility of a vote to express their support to a "higher ranking" individual.
There is no separation of powers: Admins are judges and hangmen in one person and have plenty of possibilities to cover up their action behind weakly worded policies.
Generally speaking - we must not forget, that Wikipedia is a social community, where all (good and bad) associated mechanisms play along.
best regards