[WikiEN-l] Administrator flameout: Naconkantari

[Fred Bauder]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: William Pietri [mailto:william at scissor.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, May 1, 2007 08:35 AM
>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Administrator flameout: Naconkantari
>
>Fred Bauder wrote:
>> The warning signs were when the Arbitration Committee decided that continual agitation was just "free speech". We all know the users who have taken the lead. The precipitating event is at:
>>
>> Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Kelly Martin 4
>>   
>
>So after reading that and rummaging, I've got a couple of questions.
>
>It seems like Naconkantari had recently taken some heat for too-vigorous 
>blocking. Then he blocked several people on the RFC you link to above, 
>shortly before the RFC was deleted. Doc Glasgow, one of the people 
>blocked, offers this as an explanation:
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=next&oldid=127270326
>
>Given that, is it fair to think of Naconkantari as one of those people 
>who got caught in what I think of as the "overburdened admin spiral", 
>where a tired person becomes more short-tempered, causing incidents that 
>weary them further? And that this was just the final turn of that spiral?

Yes, best to cut back a bit when you see this happening to yourself. But to know you need to do that, you have to have had the experience of getting into a mess because you didn't. (Assuming one can only learn the hard way, by experience)

>Also, when you refer to ArbCom-blessed continual agitation, is that the 
>same thing as the ANI reference to free passes for certain people?

That is just part of life. High status actors can get away with more. Not sure I could find the discussion you cite easily. Generally, it has been framed, "So and so may be nasty, but he is a great editor."

>
>Thanks,
>
>William