At 13:41 30/09/2007, you wrote:
So editors can take on the power of being an Administrator without the accountability and responsibility it entails. And yet they require my courtesy to reply when asked, and stick to the most trivial of guidelines when it suits them. This is very one-sided.
"accountability and responsibility" does not mean answering whatever questions anyone wants to ask them. If you have a problem with an admin, you can always go to ArbCom - it is through ArbCom that admins are held accountable.
I doubt any admin would block someone for not answering a question. More likely, they would decide that someone has done something worthy of being blocked, but ask them for an explanation to give them a chance to get out of it. You are being blocked for the original offence, not for failing to answer the question. The same applies to admins during ArbCom cases - if there is a clear case against them, and they don't respond to the case, they can expect to be desysopped. They have the option of responding to the case and possible explaining their way out of it.
Sorry, not in my experience with an Admin who had ignored ALL of my requests.
After I went to ArbCom it was refused, partly because it was thought to be a similar case to my previous ArbCom (it wasn't), and partly because I received my 12 month ban... which I can't check because people won't give examples of where I've supposed to be bad.
Catch 22.
Regards,
Ian Tresman www.plasma-universe.com
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org