geni wrote:
> 2009/2/12 David Gerard <[email protected]>:
>   
>> Indeed. As I suggested, a small amount of enforcement of good
>> behaviour amongst the admins by the ArbCom will go a long way to
>> getting all admins to behave in a more fitting manner. As Lar pointed
>> out, the admin bit is so much of "no big deal" that people will do
>> anything not to lose it.
>>     
>
> No. Arbcom needs one of a pretty narrow set of Casus bellis to even
> act. There are quite a selection of problematical actions an admin can
> carry out that arbcom will never be a realistic threat against. In
> theory this kind of thing should be prevented by other admins but that
> isn't always too effective.
>
>   
People have thought that in the past - that the ArbCom won't act against 
admins doing certain things - and they have been wrong. Your theory is 
more like wishful thinking from the admin side: there is a  tariff, 
there are procedural things that are constants. In other words the old 
business of a system that can be gamed in some ways, because it is too 
rigid.  David is essentially correct, and it is faitly obvious that 
sanctions have a deterrent effect on most people (though not all).

Charles


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply via email to