Gregory Maxwell wrote:
The claim you are referring to made is that only if users are bad admins are pissed, not if and only if.
I'm sorry, this sentence does not parse grammatically. Please rephrase? :)
I omitted 'being' before made. Your (2) is effectively: Only if users are bad admins are pissed
"Only if" is the converse of "if", right? So the above statement means: "If admins are annoyed [at a user], then that user has been bad". This is the argument that is often used here to justify discriminating behaviour against a newbie.
It seemed to me that you were reading (2) as : If and only if users are bad admins are pissed.
No, I'm not. You are thinking of the converse of the above, which is:
"If a user has been bad, then admins get annoyed at that user"
but I am actually saying that (2) implies that
"If users gets annoyed at the admins, then the admins have been bad"
which is a consequence of (2) and the fact that both users and admins are human beings.
Does it? Are you alleging that all or most annoyed people speak up? I don't think so.
No, I'm claiming that we have a lot of users and that you've failed to make any attempt to demonstrate that the level of complaint we are seeing is significant.
Okay -- by that argument, invidivual admins are quick to block and ban users who they are unhappy about, without making any attempt to demonstrate that the other admins' level of unhappiness about the user is significant.
I am quite sure that mistakes are made... and that we even have a few low quality admins. ... But I've seen no information which causes me to believe that this should be considered a high priority problem
You'd rather continue to have this flurry of angry complaints on this mailing list? :)
They don't bother me. You can always unsubscribe if they bother you.
Please don't stray away from the argument. Unsubscribing does not make them go away -- the users would still get annoyed at the admins, and would still complain. I am not bothered by the fact that I *see* the complaints, but about the fact that users are generally unhappy about the admins and their behaviour towards them.
How else could I respond? Even if everything were perfect we'd still get complaints...
Didn't you notice that the complaints we receive are almost all complaining about the same thing (namely, admin abuse)? Didn't you notice that almost all of them complain that the admins do not follow the policies they claim to value so much? They are not random complaints about random things. They are about one very specific issue.
Now if you actually think that the complaints are evidence of something that needs improvment, please provide evidence...
The complaining users have already done that numerous times. All of that evidence is usually brushed under the rug, and the topic changed to collecting evidence of that user's own wrong-doing (the "tu quoque" fallacy). I get the impression that the percentage of people on this mailing list who take any of those evidence-presenting complaints seriously is alarmingly low.
Timwi