Sysops are expected, more than other users, to conform to Wikipedia policy and can indeed be sanctioned for failures to do so as part of the dispute resolution procedure. Which I suggest you follow rather than flogging the mailing list. Fred From: "C A S [name omitted for privacy reasons]" <a[name omitted for privacy reasons](a)msn.com&gt; Reply-To: English Wikipedia &lt;wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org&gt; Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 14:28:38 -0500 To: &lt;wikiEN-l(a)wikipedia.org&gt; Subject: [WikiEN-l] Sysop Accountability (Yes or No?) Should Sysops be held to the rule of law? Should Sysops be required to respect due process? Should they be required to understand the burden of proof, and agree with the concept of "innocent until proven guilty?" Should sysops face administrative discipline, when they break the rules governing their action? For instance, should sysops face justice when they ban a user who hasn't been creating clear and obvious vandalism; in a situation where consensus cannot be found for the banning, where a quick poll has not been successful, where neither the arbitration committee nor Jimbo Wales has supported the ban...should such sysops be admonished, or should they feel free to continue with their vigilantism? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sysop_Accountability_Policy _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l