[WikiEN-l] the elephant in the room

[Steve Summit]

Joe Szilagyi wrote:
> Is it acceptable to consider some admins exempt from certain policy,
> or to enforce it less stringently towards admins?

I've certainly noticed that some admins are weaker at following
policy than they are at enforcing it.  And it certainly does
sometimes seem that admins back each other up a smidge too
readily, and give each other the benefit of the doubt, when
cries are raised that they've misbehaved.

I observe this most often with respect to WP:CIVIL and WP:BITE.
Some admins know that they know these policies, and know that
they're following them, and so don't realize that they aren't.
Typical scenario: innocent newbie does something wrong and is
told so by an admin.  Newbie interprets blunt statement of fact
as a scolding, and says so.  Admin and/or fellow admin says,
no little newbie, don't take that as a personal attack, admin
was just letting you know how we do things here, this is the
internet, and you might need a thicker skin if you're going to
edit here, people seem blunt sometimes.  Newbie doesn't quite
get the point, and does the same wrong thing again.  Admin
reverts newbie.  Newbie complains, mentioning word "vandalism"
in conjunction with admin.  Admin promptly blocks newbie for two
hours, under WP:NPA, to "cool off", directing newbie not to call
admin a vandal again.

But with that said, I hasten to add that most of the time I've
observed this sort of thing, the admins in question really *were*
acting with the best interests of the project at heart.  That is,
the net result of their indiscretions is usually not that the
project is directly harmed, but rather, that new editors are
given too many opportunities to conclude (based on the evidence
they've seen) that there's a cabal of administrators ganging up
on and/or conspiring against them.