On 2/7/06, Hedley <hedleyness(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think it is fair to say that Jimbo should never be
over-ruled in he blocks
somebody. The main reason is that, although there is always the argument
that a block may be unfair or that it may be 'uncalled for', Jimbo deals
with a whole side of Wikipedia that not many of us are 'in the know' about.
And that side is the legal side of things. If there's ever a legal problem
with Wikipedia, he is the first to know, and I'm sure I'm right in saying
that sometimes it just isn't possible for him to go into specifics about it
He is free list "legal reasons" in the block log.
None of his recent blocks appear to have been for legal reasons.
There are whole sides to wikipedia Jimbo doesn't see. The same is of
course true for all of us.
He often steps in and blanks pages, and blocks users,
because he is - no matter how much of a Wiki system this is - the person
who, along with the other board members, essential runs Wikipedia. He's at
the top of the tree.
If a serious legal threat ever comes along to Wikipedia, and he blocks
somebody to eliminate that legal threat, we don't want to be put at risk by
a sysop coming along and unblocking because the block is 'possibly unfair'.
I'd say that, when Jimbo steps in, it's pretty important. He doesn't edit 24
hours a day and when he gets involved in using his sysop capabilities on
Wikipedia, it's for a very good reason.
I doubt anyone would pull a block he put in place as long as he made
it clear it was for legal reasons.
Simply put, if Jimbo needs to get involved in a
'wheel war', he doesn't need
his actions to be undone. He's busy enough as it is, I'm sure, and I'm
absolutely confident, as many of us are, that he is always doing what is
best for Wikipedia and its future.
I will of course accept he is trying to do that. However I don't think
the position that he has never made a mistake is defendible.
The moral of the story? Instead of talking about how
'wheel war' is, we should be trying to move on from it, and we should be
making it yesterday's news today.
[mode=cynical] Probably the simpest way to do that would be to start
another deletion debate[/mode]
It was mentioned earlier in this thread that
'these rules' don't apply to
Jimbo, and that is something I agree with. Without Jimbo, Angela and the
rest of the Wikimedia Foundation, there is no Wikipedia. We need to trust
their actions, and get back to building Wikipedia, not questioning it.
You know back when Jimbo was basicaly planning to outright apoint
arbcom this year he stated that the community would still have control
because they made policy. I'm sure you can see the issue here.~~~~