On 1/24/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) alphasigmax@gmail.com wrote:
John Lee wrote:
Sam Fentress (Asbestos) wrote:
On 1/23/06, Peter Mackay peter.mackay@bigpond.com wrote:
I don't think anyone is disputing the desirability of having an admin discussion list where non-admins can't post. Non-admins shouldn't be able to participate in such a list, and the reasons given above go a long way towards justifying this.
I think some people are disputing precisely this. I hate the idea of an admin-only room, list or anything else. It's written in a dozen places all over the project: Admins are janitors; admins just get to use a few extra buttons; admins are not above regular editors; adminship should be no big deal.
There is nothing that we could discuss that we would need to bad others from listening to and contributing to. Policy? Nowhere is it written or even suggested that admins only make policy. Blocking decisions? This is always open on the wiki and admin decisions are always transparent and open to accountability. How to use admin buttons? Use a talk page, write an email, or go to #wikipedia. People we don't like? Edit wars we'd like assistance on? Notable polls we want our friends voting in? If people need to discuss any of these things, there are plenty of other venues.
This isn't a trivial matter. Outside of email lists, this is the first time (as far as I'm aware) that we have any forum designed specifically to hide from the rest of the community, to discuss things in secret, to set one group over and above another.
I'm not against an admin-oriented channel: just against a hidden, exclusive, admin-only channel.
I've said it before, I'll say it again: Delegate this sort of thing -- i.e. the Foundation pushing things down to the guys in the trenches -- to the 'crats. They don't have enough work as it is. ;-)
We need more people on OTRS and helpdesk-l,
Does OTRS get many copyvio compliants? If so how do I join?
-- geni