[WikiEN-l] BLPs in the papers
raphael at psi.co.at
Wed Feb 20 22:34:43 UTC 2008
Wily D schrieb:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Raphael Wegmann <raphael at psi.co.at> wrote:
>> Raphael Wegmann schrieb:
>> > David Gerard schrieb:
>> >> What you mean is "I can't get my way, no-one agrees with me and I
>> >> can't produce any evidence for my assertions when called on them - It
>> >> must be an ADMIN CONSPIRACY."
>> > Do I really have to guide you to:
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/images
>> > It happens all the time, that admins use their privileges to gain
>> > advantage in a content dispute. I complained about it many times,
>> > but no admin ever lost his admin status over it. The only reaction
>> > I usually get is: "The admin should have asked another person to
>> > do it for him."
>> > RfCs on admins don't work either.
>> > In-groups usually defend each other against out-groups.
>> > That isn't conspiracy, it's sociology.
>> David Gerard schrieb:
>> > Nice one to Cool Hand Luke.
>> That's exactly what I expected.
>> Divert the topic when it becomes inconvenient.
> No offence intended, but it's hard to respond to a "All admins are
> abusive and powerful" without sounding smarmy.
That's not what I said.
> But yes, when an admin performs the correct action in circumstances
> where it might've been preferable they let someone else do it, what
> should anyone do about it, beyond say something to the admin in
> question? If we start discipling admins for taking correct actions
> too often, soon they'll be nobody around to keep order & do
That's an interesting answer. Are you saying that violating policy
is the right action for admins?
More information about the WikiEN-l