[WikiEN-l] One alternative

[Ken Arromdee]

On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, George Herbert wrote:
> Spoiler warnings wasn't an admin decision.
> 
> The people who took the action were admins, but they didn't do so under
> color of authority per se, as far as I am aware and the discussions here
> went recently.

But attempts to get the spoiler warning change rescinded were blocked by
admins.  The arbcom case was closed and the request for revoking AWB was
rejected.  And one reason it's pointless to start reverting the policy
changes made is that we all know that admins will consider the spoiler
warning proponents to be edit-warring, not the opponents.

(Or at least one reason it was pointless back then.  The main reason it's
pointless *now* is that even though no-warnings never really had consensus,
it is now perceived to be the status quo, and so repeatedly taking it out of
a policy would be considered edit warring, not reverting a change made without
consensus, even though that's exactly what it is.)