I don't know what you expect, Björn, but a certain degree of
protection is needed for anyone who's been submitted to an arbcom
complaint. We can't just let anyone accuse someone without the arbcom
being given evidence of the violations in question.
Secondly, a lot of users go straight onto the attack of a blocking or
reverting admin while simply asking to undo their actions or asking
for an explanation would be much more helpful.
Also, you can't expect admins to be infallible all the time. I've made
some bad decisions, but I've always been open to discussion.
Still, there's enough good reasons to put admins who repeatedly fail
to discuss their controversial actions.
BTW Arbcom complaints don't need to be signed by someone else, that RFCs.
On 6/1/05, BJörn Lindqvist <bjourne(a)gmail.com> wrote:
There are a number of administrators who are failing in
responsibility, and they are present on this list.
Name them. Take them to ArbCom.
Total Bullshit. That has been done many times by new users who was
harassed my some overly aggressive admins. Ofcourse they never suceed
because the rules are complex and setup to protect the administrators.
First you have to "file a complaint" which means you have to gather
evidence and then submit that for public review to get the ArbCom to
accept it. Then you need to get someone else to sign your complaint
within 24 hours or else your complaint is automatically rejected and
20 seconds later some admin will come around and delete it so that all
traces of whatever it was is gone. The person seconding your complaint
obviously cannot be a user someone can suspect being a sockpuppet or a
troll or "a known troublemaker". And most important, the other user
must also be involved in the dispute between you and the admin in
And then, if you succeed with all that, your complaint is accepted for
further review in the ArbCom! Woho! Then all that is left is for you
to fight in the Wikipedia version of a trial against someone who knows
all the rules, while you are a newbie and has lots of powerful friends
while you only have enemies.
But what if you, like a hero in Hollywood, manages to beat the
unbeatable, win the unwinnable and actually get the ArbCom to issue
some kind of verdict AGAINST the admin in question? Well, then you'll
forever be known as a troublemaker/troll and the admin will be quickly
forgiven by his or her peers because "he/she is a good guy" and only
made a mistake/got played by the trolls.
WikiEN-l mailing list