On 6/30/05, Rebecca misfitgirl@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/29/05, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
Let me remind you that I have never voted on requests for adminship before, and that I have never insulted or in any way had a confrontation with any Wikipedia admin. Do you have any proof of these accusations?
The only person to make such ridiculous claims as an 'anti-admin lobby' and 'me whinging' is you. Maybe you have strong feelings about that - but that is certainly no reason to attack or insult others in this way.
That was not specifically directed at you; rather, the previous poster. I apologise if I worded my point badly. The point is that if you want rollback, apply for adminship. Adminship should *not* be seen as some form of supreme power structure, as much as some users (and I don't count you as one of those) have tried very hard to make it so. It's simply a mop and a broom - and if you want that mop and broom, apply for it through the normal process rather than getting it by another name for no good reason.
-- ambi
On 6/29/05, Rebecca misfitgirl@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/30/05, Rebecca misfitgirl@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/29/05, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
Let me remind you that I have never voted on requests for adminship before, and that I have never insulted or in any way had a confrontation with any Wikipedia admin. Do you have any proof of these accusations?
The only person to make such ridiculous claims as an 'anti-admin lobby' and 'me whinging' is you. Maybe you have strong feelings about that - but that is certainly no reason to attack or insult others in this way.
That was not specifically directed at you; rather, the previous poster. I apologise if I worded my point badly. The point is that if you want rollback, apply for adminship. Adminship should *not* be seen as some form of supreme power structure, as much as some users (and I don't count you as one of those) have tried very hard to make it so. It's simply a mop and a broom - and if you want that mop and broom, apply for it through the normal process rather than getting it by another name for no good reason.
-- ambi _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
ambi
Your claim is still ridiculous, regardless of who you addressed it to. (There is no anti-admin cabal.)
Adminship is the granting of the tools necessary and desired to assist with the mission of Wikipedia and nothing more.
I prefer to leave the tools regarding dominance and control of other users in other, more experienced hands. For example, I couldn't begin to tell you what impact an IP block has, and I don't care to learn. At this time, I have no interest in protecting a page and would rather leave that power in the hands of those more experienced in judging when it is appropriate to do so.
Further, there are admin candidates that, at this time, I'd hate to see get the ability to block others, yet would still benefit greatly from the rollback tool. An example is Weyes. On this page, [[User_talk:Ozdusters]], he posted something to the effect of "this is your final warning, do this one more time and you'll be blocked". This is a very aggressive, authoritarian thing to post, especially when he didn't have any ability to back up his threats, and why it'll be at least another month or two before I would consider supporting him as an admin.* However, I think Weyes would be extremely well served by having the rollback tool available to him.
*(Unless he's made an admin over my objections, in which case I'll immediately support him as an admin.)
This is an example of why I think separation of the rollback tool is a great idea.
The fact that I don't covet all of your admin tools shouldn't be used as an excuse for you to dismiss my ongoing concerns that they are used properly.