Zephram Stark wrote: <snip>
I can think of one reason: total disclosure would not be loyal to the cause. The faithfulness I see amongst administrators is important to the smooth operation of an association. Yet historically, it has also been the breeding ground for corruption. Exclusion is a sure warning sign that methods of punishment are forming and malfeasance is creeping into the system. When it gets to the point that administrators like Jayjg and SlimVirgin don't even try to tie punishment back to any rule or standard of Wikipedia, we can know for certain that their actions are driving off good editors and contributors to this work.
Dear sir, I find your ideas intriguing / interesting and wish to subscribe to your newsletter / journal.
At some point, the corruption becomes so blatant that it is impossible to get much of anything productive accomplished. At that point, the system fails. I hope you will not wait that long. When there is ample evidence of two of your administrators using their power to bias the content of articles, it is time for them to relinquish that power. Loyalty can include all Wikipedia editors when our editing power is equal.
1. Make everyone a sysop. 2. ??? 3. Profit!
YHBT YHL HAND.