On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Raphael Wegmann raphael@psi.co.at wrote:
Wily D schrieb:
The short answer is "Policy does not work that way" - the longer answer is "Even if policy did work that way, it's allowed by policy (i.e. [[WP:IAR]])". WP:PROT also reads "Administrators should not protect or unprotect a page for this reason if they are in any way involved in the dispute." which grammatically means Admins are allowed to protect or unprotect pages when they're involved in a dispute, it's simply discouraged. If it was supposed to be forbidden it would read "Administrators may not protect or unprotect a page for this reason if they are in any way involved in the dispute." which would forbid it. The reality is that if you're involved, you're less likely to take the correct action and need to be extra diligent.
In short, they're not violating policy.
How about WP:BLOCK? "Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute."
Is it still "correct action" if they do?
-- Raphael
One, of course, still has the legs of IAR, the general principle of "no lawyering" and so forth to stand on from time to time, but in general no. Of course "content dispute" is a nebulous term, and oft times overly broadly defined by those who're misbehaving - if you removing trolling, for instance, the person trolling will inevitably claim they're in a content dispute with you, which is simply not true.
But if they make a correct block in that situation, what is it you're hoping someone else would do? Unblock then reblock? In an "all volunteer" justice system, it's hard to get people roused about technicalities when justive has been done.
Cheers WilyD