We have had the similar kind of discussion at svwiki, where an obviously not
rightous (obvious to most of us, at least) block was applied and re-applied
three times by one particular admin, and lifted three times by three
different admins. Some peoples main concern, and these were people I highly
respect, was that the "taboo" of lifting blocks applied by other admins
would now be gone. While I saw that as something healthy, others did not and
pointed out how good some trolls are at manipulating the community making
others believe they have been wronged - removing of this "taboo" would make
troll control more difficult. While I can understand that standpoint, I
don't believe this can be a healthy position in the long run.
/Habj
On 11/3/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
Mark Williamson wrote:
The problem seems to lie in smaller, more
authoritarian communities.
Any Wiki could turn into a dictatorship with the policy we currently
have in place. The bureaucrats get to make all of the decisions. Of
course, they can be voted out, but I don't think it's likely that
people would attempt to organise a vote against someone who has
probably already scared them away.
The important thing is to find some sort of balance. A bureaucrat does
need the freedom to make decisions and act, often unilaterally, on
them. He needs to pay attention to his community and use that to guide
his actions. There will nevertheless be times when he will act in a way
contrary to the community's wishes. That is not inherently wrong, but
the bureaucrat proceeds at his own peril. If he overuses that power he
will face repeated complaints, and in extreme situations a putsch.
Occassional complaints go with the territory. To a certain extent I
think that communities appreciate a bureaucrat who can be fair in his
decisiveness, and who can take some conflicted issues in a particular
direction just to be done with it.
Thus it seems to me that every Wiki should have
two or more bureaucrats.
Sometimes, but that is the wrong reason for a second bureaucrat. We
don't want the situation of a project with two bureaucrats that are
constantly in opposition to each other. As long as a bureaucrat's
duties are very light the only reason for a second bureaucrat is to have
someone available during extended absences.
Ec
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l