[WikiEN-l] To: Jimmy Wales - Admin-driven death of Wikipedia
stevagewp at gmail.com
Mon May 29 12:06:38 UTC 2006
On 5/29/06, Nick Boalch <n.g.boalch at durham.ac.uk> wrote:
> Conrad Dunkerson wrote:
> > Look around at your fellow admins from time to time and ask yourself... is
> > there ANY way this person could pass an RFA at this point? If the answer
> > is 'no' then the de facto situation is that a person who does NOT have the
> > support or respect of the community has powers which are only supposed to
> > be held by those who DO... and that inherently breeds disruption and
> > resentment and ongoing damage to Wikipedia as a whole.
> I don't think that is a particularly fair test. As is obvious, admins
> are occasionally called upon to perform actions that upset people -- I
> don't think admins should shrink from making those hard choices.
> I can think of several thoroughgoingly solid admins, people who temper a
> good knowledge of policy with a healthy dose of knowing that what we're
> here to do is write an encyclopaedia, who I doubt would pass an RfA
> because they've done things that have made them controversial or
> unpopular in certain sectors of the community.
> The community giveth, and the community taketh away -- but it taketh
> away under the auspices of proper consideration by the arbitration
> committee, not by having unpopular admins strung up by a baying lynchmob.
I agree with this. Funnily enough, I originally read RFA as "request
for arbitration" and agreed with the comment. I don't think admins
necessarily need to enjoy broad-based popularity, but they do need the
support of the most experienced Wikipedians, including arbitors. No
one expects police to be popular - but you do expect them to have the
support of the people who appoint them.
More information about the WikiEN-l