Sysops are expected, more than other users, to conform to Wikipedia policy
and can indeed be sanctioned for failures to do so as part of the dispute
resolution procedure. Which I suggest you follow rather than flogging the
mailing list.
Fred
From: "C A S [name omitted for privacy reasons]" <a[name omitted for privacy
reasons](a)msn.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 14:28:38 -0500
To: <wikiEN-l(a)wikipedia.org>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Sysop Accountability (Yes or No?)
Should Sysops be held to the rule of law? Should Sysops be required to
respect due process? Should they be required to understand the burden of
proof, and agree with the concept of "innocent until proven guilty?" Should
sysops face administrative discipline, when they break the rules governing
their action?
For instance, should sysops face justice when they ban a user who hasn't
been creating clear and obvious vandalism; in a situation where consensus
cannot be found for the banning, where a quick poll has not been successful,
where neither the arbitration committee nor Jimbo Wales has supported the
ban...should such sysops be admonished, or should they feel free to continue
with their vigilantism?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sysop_Accountability_Policy
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l