Generally it is a good idea for admins to have user e-mail enabled, I doubt many would dispute that. However, it should not be made to seem compulsory. We are, after all, volunteers here and if one admin does not have e-mail enabled it should be easy enough to e-mail another. I don't like the idea that admins "must" do certain things, there is nothing they must do.

The short answer is: If I block someone, it's not like I have to respond to their emails anyhow. While it'd be nice to enable an email address - if I'm not taking emails, it'd be better if that was clear, rather than dishonestly letting them sit in an "in" bin forever. Anybody's who's been blocked can request a review from a second admin anyhow {{unblock|reason}} WilyD

On 9/13/07, Wily D <wilydoppelganger(a)gmail.com> wrote: That's a rather hostile attitude to take towards the community of editors, that you can block, and their response to the block doesn't matter. "Start by finding out when your block will expire.... If you do not wish to wait for your block to expire, you may contact the blocking administrator via email to resolve the problem that led to the block. To use this feature you must have a valid email address registered in your user preferences. If, after discussing the matter with them, you still believe your block is unfair, you may appeal the block by requesting that another administrator review your block. But it's a total lie that "you may contact the blocking administrator via e-mail to resolve the problem." Becaue you can't contact the blocking administrator via email and even if you can, they don't have to respond, and they're rather smug about telling everyone they're free to ignore you. What's wrong with this picture? Just about everything. So, in other words, it should say, "You may attempt to contact the blocking administrator via e-mail" but the blocking adminstrator is not required to have e-mail enabled, and might not respond to you, and damn proudly not respond, either. KP _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

On 9/16/07, Wily D <wilydoppelganger(a)gmail.com> wrote: But that's not what the instructions for unblock say. They say to discuss it first with the blocking admin, and IF you do that are unsuccessful you may then proceed to request a review. They don't say use {{unblock|reason}}. By not enabling email you' ve denied people you've blocked any access to requesting an unblock. I've been blocked once, by an admin who has gone through a couple of RFCs and an ArbCom. When I emailed a request to him to be unblocked he posted nasty comments about my email, lied, to incite me on AN/I. It was a stunning display of boorish and immature behaviour, though certainly not unexpected from an admin who called an editor a douche. If I could have bipassed e-mailing the little twirp, I certainly would have, but it was clear that I was supposed to request unblock from the little shit first. Now you tell me you can't be bothered to even get e-mails. If the policy requires you to email the blocking admin first in order to appeal the block, then all blocking admins should enable their email. Or admins should just admit that blocks are not appealable and they have the power to do whatever they want regardless. This is grossly insulting to us worthless little shit peon editors on Wikipedia whatever the reason. It is. KP The blocking message: Start by finding out when your block will expire. Go to my contributions and follow the Block log link at the top of the page. If there are no blocks listed, or the latest one has already expired, then you have been autoblocked. Please follow the instructions listed in the section (on AutoBlocking) below. If you do not wish to wait for your block to expire, you may contact the blocking administrator via email to resolve the problem that led to the block. To use this feature you must have a valid email address registered in your user preferences. If, after discussing the matter with them, you still believe your block is unfair, you may appeal the block by requesting that another administrator review your block. To do so, add {{unblock|your reason here}} to the bottom of your user talk page (which you can edit while blocked, unless it is protected) to request unblocking. Please be aware that abuse of this template will result in protection of that page. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Disclaimer: I don't really care. I would be more interested in giving blocked or banned users instructions for getting pages courtesy blanked or deleted,

except unless you have a lawyer there doesn't seem to be any real procedure for that, or at least not one that's any better than the ED procedure.

I've been attacked for asking for certain material to be blanked from WP (some of which was even removed from WR) ... it was really much like asking ED to blank or delete something... the whole hey she responded let's hurt her even more!

Generally it is a good idea for admins to have user e-mail enabled, I doubt many would dispute that. However, it should not be made to seem compulsory.

Lists are kind of dehumanising. Have you discussed the matter with the admins personally?

On 13/09/2007, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote: Someone might take it that way. (And apparently somoneone did.)

True... then again, trying to contact said individuals privately isn't exactly bending over backwards... and not all of us will ever agree what a non-issue is.

*wonders if you would want to be listed on a mailing list to which you were not subscribed*

On 9/12/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> I assume this list or a pointer to it has been posted to all the usual > admin hangouts?

Ah, I see you've volunteered. ;)

Or why not just have someone use a bot to leave them all talk page notes?

(Gasp) Oh no! Off with their heads! Off with their heads! Those bad, bad email-less admins. Lets have ourselves a witchunt instead of doing the right (read: boring) thing and asking them on their talk pages about it! I do loves me a witchunt.

On Sep 12, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Steven Walling wrote: We're sorry, but your tenuous grasp of reality seems to have failed. Unfortunately, we do not troubleshoot tenuous grasps of reality via this system at this time. Please fuck off and try your e-mail again when you're sufficiently medicated to note that, actually, all anybody had suggested in this thread was contacting those administrators. Thank you for using wikien-l. If you have any further questions, for the love of God, go post somewhere else.

Not had your coffee yet?

6:58 PM, RLS wrote: The answer is, in fact, C: Copious amounts of gin.

t 6:58 PM, RLS wrote: The answer is, in fact, C: Copious amounts of gin. -Phil _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

(Gasp) Oh no! Off with their heads! Off with their heads! Those bad, bad email-less admins. Lets have ourselves a witchunt instead of doing the right (read: boring) thing and asking them on their talk pages about it! I do loves me a witchunt.

Gregory Maxwell wrote: I'm somewhat surprised to find my name on that list, since I've gotten email through the "email this user" feature several times before, and haven't changed my email address since then. But sure enough, it seems my address is no longer "confirmed". Does this reset itself requiring me to reconfirm periodically or something?

I think the initiative to ensure that people had secure login passwords (which happened, oh, months back) reset people's email preferences - I had no idea that my preferences had changed until a good while later (not that it matters much in my case, but however...)