QUOTE(jd turk @ Thu 2nd February 2012, 11:35pm)
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 1st February 2012, 10:31pm)
Encyclopedist, I would like to ask you, if, when you supported Gwen's RFA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...hip/Gwen_Gale_2
were you aware about these statements of her made by one of her other accounts Wyss (T-C-L-K-R-D)
I've been gone from here for weeks now, and I return to find Mbz1 still swinging at Gwen Gale, using 6+ year old diffs as evidence. It actually makes me feel good, there's at least something in my life that's consistent.
As for bad blocks, they're not just exclusive to Gwen or any of the other couple of admins brought up in this thread. What bothers me the most about bad blocks is when an admin issues one, then vanishes. The recent (probably 3 months, maybe?) example that comes to mind involved an admin swooping in and leveling a block on a good faith editor with over a thousand edits, and no warning. When the confusion happened, the admin just split. The block was rightfully overturned, the admin waited out the anger, then came back and all was calmer and forgiven.
There's no accountability for the bad blocks. There should be a permanent record for admins, like there is at the long-term abuse page for the blocked.
Going by what I had seen of Gwen Gale's record, I saw no reason to oppose her RFA. I had other stuff to do than conduct a deep witch hunt, and on the face of it, I see that others have perhaps done that. "Due diligence" has little meaning on WP, and if an editor votes in favour or against is rarely accompanied by a fully-detailed rationale, more likely is it a distillation of impressions gained from experience. It's not up to me to say whether that is a correct approach. HTH