On 6/6/07, David Goodman <dgoodmanny(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I would never intervene administratively in a matter where I have
debated. But the established people do this all the time, and think it
justified.
To be impolite, this is because there are no real immediate repercussions to
be had short of going nuts with a sysop bit, blocking Jimbo, and deleting
the main page. A regular user who starts warring and being incivil generally
will be blocked and/or heavily tongue lashed and chastised. Established
users, and in particular certain admins, generally have free reign to do
whatever they please. They're not likely to be blocked, and more
importantly, they are--short of ArbCom or their going completely batshit
insane--won't lose their admin status.
It's far too easy for any idiot to get admin status. Put up a nice facade,
rack up your 3,000 to 5,000 edits, do your 3-6 months of time, don't piss
off anyone critically, and voila: you get buttons.
It's equally for too difficult for the idiots with bits to be knocked off.
This is a major problem. The community, if empowered to desysop as well as
sysop, would put a stop to half the problems of such a nature.
Unfortunately, that would not happen, because such a movement would require
administrative support to become policy, and all the admins would then have
bullseyes on them if they misbehaved (theoretically). It's unfortunate, but
understandable. And unfortunately, it will likely not change.
Regards,
Joe
http://www.joeszilagyi.com