Thu 17th November 2011, 5:23pm
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 17th November 2011, 1:43pm)
3. Arbcom was specifically asked by the "community" whether they could answer a simple yes-or-no question on whether they were aware that Law was a sockpuppet. Half of Arbcom refused to answer a simple yes-or-no question and Risker even tried to censor that aspect of the discussion.
Not only members of govcom, but even regular administrators have difficulties in answering simple yes-or-no questions.
For example gwen gale often responds to canvassing. she blocked me while responding to canvassing.
For almost a year I kept asking wikipedia administrators including members of govcom a simple yes-or-no question: was gwen gale responding to canvassing, when she blocked me.
It was like a game. I was having fun, watching how different administrators were trying to avoid a direct response: Here's I asked EdJohnston a direct question
Please help me to understand why this message is not canvasing, and I will apologize for naming it this way. In response I got a general explanation about canvassing
Admins ought to be uncanvassable. Any admin who gets an improper request on their talk page should not take the proposed action. If they do, a question may be raised as to their fitness to be an admin. So the concept of 'canvassing an admin' is rather backwards.
After that I asked one more time, if I should apologize to gwen for saying she responded to canvassing, but I got no response at all.
It took me almost a year to find an honest and unafraid administrator, who gave me a direct response: Yes, gwen gale was responding to canvassing, and she should not have been the one
to block you.
How much more fun editing wikipedia could have been, if there were more honest, decent and unafraid administrators!