On 2/9/07, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
Bleah. I couldn't even read the whole thing, it's so sordid and petty.
The CVU has rather a good record of bringing new people into the community. So when a group of admins falls for a troll and trys to take action against the first group to make you feel part of a community on wikipedia it is understandable that you are going to want to make sure that doesn't happen again.
There are many hurts in life. I know Mr. Linkspam-Cabo-every-day is bummed that I revert him over and over, he's even said so, but his goal is to make a buck no matter what it does to WP. I'm sure if he was smarter, he could find editors to testify to the arbcom that I'm being a mean and nasty admin by not reverting him with an individually-composed, sensitive, and caring message each time, and should be desysopped as an example to the others. So, are you on his side, or on mine?
That would the false dilemma logical fallacy.
No one is objecting to linkspamers being reverted or blocked. Problem is the community know admins don't just limit themselves to that kind of activity
If I'm not going to be supported by other editors, admin or not, then I don't want to be an admin any longer.
We have no right to demand support. We have to earn it.