[Wikipedia-l] Indefinite ban problem

[Ian Tresman]

At 13:41 30/09/2007, you wrote:
> > So editors can take on the power of being an Administrator without
> > the accountability and responsibility it entails. And yet they
> > require my courtesy to reply when asked, and stick to the most
> > trivial of guidelines when it suits them. This is very one-sided.
>
>"accountability and responsibility" does not mean answering whatever
>questions anyone wants to ask them. If you have a problem with an
>admin, you can always go to ArbCom - it is through ArbCom that admins
>are held accountable.
>
>I doubt any admin would block someone for not answering a question.
>More likely, they would decide that someone has done something worthy
>of being blocked, but ask them for an explanation to give them a
>chance to get out of it. You are being blocked for the original
>offence, not for failing to answer the question. The same applies to
>admins during ArbCom cases - if there is a clear case against them,
>and they don't respond to the case, they can expect to be desysopped.
>They have the option of responding to the case and possible explaining
>their way out of it.


Sorry, not in my experience with an Admin who had ignored ALL of my requests.

After I went to ArbCom it was refused, partly because it was thought 
to be a similar case to my previous ArbCom (it wasn't), and partly 
because I received my 12 month ban... which I can't check because 
people won't give examples of where I've supposed to be bad.

Catch 22.

Regards,

Ian Tresman
www.plasma-universe.com