[WikiEN-l] Bureaucrats decide!

[John Lee]

On 4/10/07, Oskar Sigvardsson <oskarsigvardsson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Do you think
> this decision was fair?


Well, once you consider that many people opposed Danny for enforcing policy,
not explaining why he resigned his adminship, etc., and take them out of the
equation, it's pretty apparent that the numbers are in the room to promote
for 'crats - and that's assuming we want the 'crats to behave as cold,
calculating machines and adhere to those silly strict numbers rules we've
come up with.

Do you really think that the voices of all
> those who opposed should be ignored, just because they're (in your
> opinion) "morons"?


Well, the sad fact is, the decision to promote is a black and white one, not
grey. If you look at the decision in zero-sum terms, you might say that "the
voices of all those who opposed" were ignored - but if he had not been
promoted you can say with equal, if not more, indignation that the voices of
all those who supported were ignored.

Let's not look at it in zero-sum terms. Danny's learnt that there are a lot
of people who have valid concerns about how he has wielded his blocking
powers in the past, and that he may be BITEing the newbies a wee bit too
much (to say the least). I hope he takes these criticisms into account and
learns from them, because I personally feel that AGF and BITE remain
relevant, even in the face of spammers.

Of course, there's a chance Danny may end up totally disregarding these
concerns. But knowing Danny, it's doubtful that he'll do this. Danny cares
too much about the project and the community that's got it this far to
ignore valid concerns they may have about his conduct, and how it helps or
hurts the project we all love.

If you use reason, and disregard the "of course
> Danny should be an admin" gut feeling (that can be your opinion of
> course, but it doesn't allow you to go against consensus), then I
> think the decision is clear.


 We'll have to agree to disagree then. I don't agree with those who have
expressed surprise and/or indignation that anyone could have the gall to
oppose Danny's RfA, because there are valid and real reasons to have qualms
about him being an admin, but even then, on the balance, there is a
consensus to promote once you take into account the fact that many opposers
are opposing for totally or near-totally invalid reasons.

Johnleemk