Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Leif Knutsen Being an admin is a big deal whether we want it to or not, because admins have it in their power to do really really annoying things to editors. Aside from 24-hour blocks, locking articles in various ways, closing discussions on AFDs, CFDs, etc., they also seem to enjoy a certain level of immunity against complaints. There is, as far as I can tell, a presumption that anyone who complains about an admin is a bit of a narcissist or troublemaker. There are also constant allegations that some admins are softer on people whose POV align with theirs, etc.
There are some admins who shouldn't be. They got there because they are good editors, not because they are good at being admins.
Some get it because they are better at political games, not because they are good editors.
When an admin uses his powers to win edit wars and harass those with whom he disagrees, it's time to reassess that editor's role in the project.
Having said that, one must also consider the question - what is the highest priority? Building an encyclopaedia or having a good working community of editors?
Of course, building an encyclopedia has first priority, but a good working community of editors is essential to accomplishing that goal.
Ec