Info Control wrote:
On 4/19/07, Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)wikia.com>
wrote:
Info Control wrote:
So to be clear, this is not a sanctioned
OFFICE/WMF action and an admin
in
Good Faith can re-block?
I would not
recommend it.
--Jimbo
Are you answering from your position as an admin or something else?
I am answering as a human being who is trying to act thoughtfully and
with respect for everyone. I think that a reblock at this point would
be ill-advised.
If its
outside the scope of office/WMF I thought that your administrative voice was
no more authority than any other.
No, you are mistaken. I have a traditional role under the long standing
community rules of English Wikipedia which does not flow from WP:OFFICE
(which became a policy when I delegated some traditional powers to the
office) nor from the foundation, but from convention within the community.
I am always happy to entertain serious discussion about the advantages
and disadvantages of this method, and would support a discussion of how
to replace the method.
If you are thinking that it would be better, in terms of power for the
community, for me to be stripped of this role, I recommend a re-think.
One alternative is for the office to be tasked with this stuff. This
would result in a much less community-centric way of handling things.
If this has some unspoken legal reason for the unblock
it ought to be
disclosed. Otherwise... Slim's question is important. On what grounds would
this be not recommended? Aren't you bound to the community's will/consensus
as anyone?
I don't recommend it because it is a bad idea.
I am bound to the will of the community, as is (for example) the
arbitration committee. And notice that the will of the community is not
determined by lynch mobs but by our traditions and standards.
--Jimbo