[WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

Tue May 31 16:26:04 UTC 2005

>From: "A Nony Mouse" <tempforcomments at hotmail.com>
>In the case of Jack, there was a question of a block war. Administrators 
>were fighting over what to do with him. This is not a good thing for 
>Wikipedia editors no matter who they are. It indicates that the user is 
>less of a concern than something between the two Administrators.

It was hardly a block war; you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

>As for his complaints about being blocked, the dismissiveness on this board 
>hurt me. No matter who it is making a complaint, we have a duty to 
>investigate it. We are listed as the last resort for users who have been 
>wronged. I took the time to investigate SlimVirgin's blocking of 
>Enviroknot, and I believe that it is not valid.

I took the time to investigate, and as far as I can tell it obviously is 
valid.

>By the time I got to the discussion, it was a good series of emails long, 
>and despite the number of list members who had posted, none save SlimVirgin 
>had bothered to address Enviroknot's concerns on the block in any way. 
>SlimVirgin herself made a bad judgement call.

In your opinion.

>An edit made in good faith should never be considered a reversion, even if 
>it contains some content that is included in a later reversion.

Nonsense; who are you to judge "good faith"?  I'm sure every editor who 
reverts thinks he or she has a good reason for doing so.

>Instead of acknowledging this fact, the list members were universally 
>dismissive of Enviroknot from the first email.

They were universally dismissive because the "fact" you cite is not fact at 
all.

>We have a problem with administrators exceeding their authority on 
>Wikipedia.

There is no evidence for this.

>We have a problem with administrators not applying policy correctly.

There is no evidence for this.

>And we have a problem with arrogance on these lists, with administrators 
>believing that they are somehow better than others.

On the contrary, the problem on this list is people being incredibly 
accomodating to obviously disruptive e-mails and posters.

>There are a number of administrators who are failing in that 
>responsibility, and they are present on this list.

Name them.  Take them to ArbCom.

Jay.