I can accept what Abe is saying here, no problem. Someone please restore Abe's sysop status. We've gotten into an area here that hasn't much been explored, and so I don't want this to turn into a blame Abe/blame Erik kind of thing in any way. But we probably do need to clarify one aspect of policy. When should developers act to revoke sysop status? I would say "Almost never" although I'm willing to listen to counter-arguments. I don't say "never" because we can always keep in mind that there could be a real emergency. We're trying to be very liberal with sysop powers to keep them from being 'elite enforcers'. We're *not* being liberal with developer powers, because the whole reason we have the separation is technical and there are dangers involved. But since we're being very liberal with sysop powers, there's a chance that we'll inadvertantly approve someone who turns out to be a real problem, a nutcase. If a sysop went bonkers and started deleting huge numbers of pages, banning random ips, and the like, and if it was the weekend or at night when I might not be around to assist, then it would be appropriate for a developer to step in to protect the site. But such emergencies are going to be extremely rare, I think. After all, sysops are people we know, people who have acted normally for a period of time, and people like that don't normally just go nuts. However, when there is no emergency, just an abuse of sysop powers, then a developer should not step in directly and make a decision, even temporarily. In this case, there was minimal harm done even if Abe was wrong to protect the page (and it's unclear now that he was wrong, as his explanation is sensible enough to at least raise a reasonable doubt). A page would have been protected overnight until the issue was raised with me, and Erik and Abe and the rest of us could have had a clarifying discussion about when pages should be protected or not. My point here is not to render a verdict on whether Abe should or should not have protected the page. My point is also not to render a verdict on whether Erik should or should not have removed the sysop status. My point here is rather to say that _in the future_, it would be best if developers only act to remove sysop status in a real emergency. What we want to guard against is an elite cabal with superior powers acting to defend the site. Well, I guess I'm protecting my own elite position of 1. But things like bans and removal of sysop powers are hurtful and painful to the community, and I think the best way to handle them for now is for me to don my best "neutral Jimbo" hat and for me to act very slowly and carefully and under intense community supervision and feedback. Developer is a technical position, not a policy position. --Jimbo