User talk:68.209.2.187/adminactions

This item is a transcluded user subpage response, as I feel that this topic will grow quite large and unwieldy.

While the actions of Steve were well intentioned they are in fact quite hellish. Using another users account distorts the very essance of the account system. It destroys community relationships. Using an administrators account for administrative actions is far far more serious. I personally don't have an issue with the page protection edit, (provided there was no dispute from either Steve or the admin account). However the usage of an administrators account to block users is far beyond the pail of anything I could find common ground on. I don't know the details about the users that were blocked, but it doesn't really matter.

A non-administrator taking AA against a user (weather it be a sock, obvious vandal or anyone else) without being vested by the community (in any definition) completely and utterly violates the trust we place in admins. It causes distrust in all others. Combining these actions with a checkuser case is a slap in the face of all policies Steve intended to protect. While I like the guy I can't in any way defend him. Never been a fan of the indefinite block, given the ability to degrade into an psuedo-ban it effectively is nothing more than one user saying to another 'you and your actions are not welcome here, now or ever'. But on this one and with community involvement I frankly can't think of a behavior more inline with that statement. However WP:Block is very clear about no putative blocks. Does this mean that immediate apologies and forgiveness let Steve and anyone else walk scot free? What would such an action say to other users? "Do what you want just immediately ask for forgiveness." Do we apply policies equally to all users or do we take into account past works or good intentions? The answers to this question determines what new users and the out side world think of WP and what the community thinks of the people its chosen to guide the project.

Given that arbcom has made no statement that it will even review the issue and its history of long cases I propose that all involved be placed on the strictest probation possible until a decision is made by arbcom or the community at large. I would suggest that the users take a long wikibreak and absolutely refrain from editing any subject that would commonly be called contentious. While I respect the work that these users have placed in the past I can not remain silent on this topic. --68.209.2.187 (talk) 00:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)