Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 03:51:37 +0100
From: "A Nony Mouse" <tempforcomments(a)hotmail.com>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
I have been watching the last week's events with dismay. I have been
to compose this email for two hours, but every time I
else comes up.
I have decided to make this anonymous. I do not know how some of you
react and I do not wish to take any chance that I
would be harassed for
Good idea, I think.
There are two cases that bother me. Jack Lynch aka Sam Spade and
Snord aka Enviroknot. Both of these cases scare me
because of the
that they have set.
In the case of Jack, there was a question of a block war. Administrators
were fighting over what to do with him. This is not a good thing for
Wikipedia editors no matter who they are. It indicates that the user is
of a concern than something between the two
Maybe we should refer this case to an arbitration committee or -if it gets
really bad - to Jimbo himself. However, Jimbo (being a head honcho) is
probably a busy man, so referring to someone below is probably preferable
before sending it off to Jimbo.
It is the case of Cranston Snord aka Enviroknot that
worries me more.
is the case that has made me take the drastic step of
sending an email
the list anonymously. I had originally been trying to
type up a response
Cranston's concerns about being blocked. I believe
policy by doing so. Unfortunately for me, such an
email would likely now
a day late and a dollar short.
Cranston was a disruption to the list, but much of that disruption was
caused by other people on this list treating him with incredible
I was taken aback by his accusations against
administrators but having
looked at the cases in hand I believe that he has a point.
There were emails on this list asking whether anyone was taking him
seriously. This is the height of arrogance, and it is something that
frightens me. Administrators should never be acting as if ordinary
do not matter.
As for his complaints about being blocked, the dismissiveness on this
hurt me. No matter who it is making a complaint, we
have a duty to
investigate it. We are listed as the last resort for users who have been
wronged. I took the time to investigate SlimVirgin's blocking of
and I believe that it is not valid.
By the time I got to the discussion, it was a good series of emails
and despite the number of list members who had posted,
had bothered to address Enviroknot's concerns on
the block in any way.
SlimVirgin herself made a bad judgement call. An edit made in good faith
should never be considered a reversion, even if it contains some content
that is included in a later reversion.
Okay, but how do we distinguish an edit made in good faith from a
"reversion"? What if this edit contains mainly stuff from an earlier
revision that had been superseded, along with some new info? That could be
a reversion, one might argue, but it has a hint of fresh editing, too.
Instead of acknowledging this fact, the list members were universally
dismissive of Enviroknot from the first email. One went so far as to
that the term "rogue admin" not be used,
without addressing the reasons
it had been brought up in multiple cases recently.
Suppose that rogue admins DO exist. What do we do about them?
We have a problem with administrators exceeding their
Wikipedia. We have a problem with administrators not applying policy
correctly. And we have a problem with arrogance on these lists, with
administrators believing that they are somehow better than others.
With the increased power of administrator access comes a responsibility
use it fairly and adhere to the established procedures
and policies. The
actions of an Administrator should themselves be NPOV. We have stated
that when a user is found to be violating policy, if
they return and do
break policy, their previous transgressions should not
be held against
There are a number of administrators who are failing in that
and they are present on this list. One of them, rather
Enviroknot's concerns in a calm tone and actually going over policy,
to kickban Enviroknot entirely.
Oops. That's something called "laziness", or "impatience",
just plain being forgetful. In such cases, we should stop, take a breath,
rethink what we are doing for a moment, and review the cases of folks such
as Enviroknot. Dealing with admins fairly will go a LONG way towards