On 12/10/2007, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"Charlotte Webb" wrote
Blocks for edit-warring are common enough, but has anybody ever been desysopped for it (i.e. for edit-warring on a non-protected page)? That strikes me as an unusual "remedy".
There seems to be a theory that "you can only lose your admin powers by using them". Not quite sure where it comes from, but it's a rule of thumb. I don't entirely agree with this theory. I suppose ArbCom remedies are supposed to be improving matters, rather than being punitive.
Everyking, who was a MASSIVE pain in the backside for ages but only lost his admin bit when he offered on Wikipedia Review to repost problematic deleted material.
The usefulness is that it helps protect admins doing important but unpopular things from an upset mob of idiots.
This does have the problem that things can't be done for deterrent effect/pour encourager les autres. The snag there is that the more roguish the admin, the less the available slaps on the wrist do deter.
Almost all of our admins really do seem to be fine, y'know. Many are kids and many are imperfect, but they take the bit seriously enough. Even people I've had severe doubts about getting the bit have done good stuff and not done bad stuff. It's like getting on the arbcom and discovering you actually have access to the Big Red Buttons. "Well done, sir!" "Er. Um. Er." A suitably sobering experience.
- d.