Forum:Admin behaviour revisited

Not long ago the community raised some concerns regarding the attitudes and behaviour of admins in general as well as concerns over how user issues were being handled. With another user causing some distress to the community, I feel that it is once against time to review the manner in which issue was dealt so that we can avoid potential conflicts and misunderstandings in the future.

While I think the 5-day block on User:TheManOfIron was appropriate given his recent actions, I do not feel that it was completely justified given the circumstances. TMOI's most recent outburst was the result of edits to trivia sections on FG42 and DP28, in which an anonymous user politely raised the revert issue to User:WHISKEY35. TMOI launched an angry tirade at a remark comparing his actions to Hitler, which in itself was an intimidating action, but he posted it on Whiskey35's talk page instead of the anon's. Whiskey35 had every right to ask TMOI to cease and desist, but not like this.

If we're going to block users for intimidation and harassment, then admins should be not be taking posts personally and threatening to block users. Admins should warn users of the consequences of their actions, not threaten to use them. Personally blocking another user for comments made directly to the admin is a conflict of interest, and must be dealt with by another admin following the same processes. This was done by User:Callofduty4 in a prompt manner, though it was not necessary for Whiskey35 to write hostile correspondence to TMOI. An admin is not above a user. To see that sort of commenting from an admin is quite intimidating, and while TMOI may not have the best track record on the wiki, I'm afraid that inappropriate admin attitude contributed to his departure on bad terms. As a community, we should remember that conflicts are seldom caused by a single user, and that all users who are involved with conflicts need to be notified and warned appropriately, even if they are admins.

Secondly, TMOI's Block notification is extremely...inappropriate. Bovell and I have expressed our concerns on Callofduty4's talk page, but I feel it necessary to make it public here. It's really not that hard to write a polite notification or template for a block. Pulling off gimmicks is what pre-teen users do, not admins. I cannot take that block message seriously and it reflects poorly on the wiki's image. 1977 Constitution? Motherland? Premier Whiskey35? You might as well ban someone with "In Soviet Russia, wiki edits YOU".

That said, I want to take this opportunity as a reader and editor on CODwiki to ask admins to be fair and considerate in all cases of user issues and conflicts. A wiki functions effectively when its rules are followed and enforced. Admins cannot enforce rules if they break them. Small cases don't need to turn into public controversies. Let's take the practical, expedient option and focus on improving the wiki rather than getting into fights. --Scottie theNerd 15:18, July 25, 2010 (UTC)