Content deleted Content added
Line 37: @Primefac, would that be the venue where you personally also said it should be G8? (Which is also incorrect.) Or the venue where the entire discussion was deleted? I lose track. But since this may need some more explanation as to why I think its the more telling problem with Tamzin's judgement: The reason why we have rigid criteria for speedy deletion is that it is one of the few processes we have in place that explicitly gives Administrators permission to take actions that bypass community deletion consensus discussion. Pages are tagged, deleted, no community input. In order for that to work we have to trust the administrator a)knows and understands the rules, b)isnt going to break them. Its a user page, no one really gives a crap about the specific page. The problem is how do we know that its not being abused elsewhere. We dont, we operate on trust based on our perception of the Admin. We dont actively monitor or otherwise have oversight on every CSD action so there is no feasible other way to operate. When one is brought up and its clearly and obviously wrong, and there is no actual evidence of an admission as to why its wrong. AND it's clear they knew it was wrong when they did it, what are we supposed to do? Shrug our shoulders and go "Oh thats ok then". No, its symptomatic of a decision process that says 'I dont need to follow the rules' which is borne out in Tamzin's replies in the related discussions. (This is my final comment btw) [[User:Only in death|Only in death does duty end]] ([[User talk:Only in death|talk]]) 14:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC) @Barkeep, Knowing ARBCOM are not going to accept a case and thinking they should accept a case are two different things. Do I genuinely feel Tamzin's judgement is so bad that it merits their tools removed? Of course. Arbcom is the only venue for this and has made it perfectly clear only Arbcom will deal with that. Do I genuinely feel Arbcom are going to accept this request? Of course not, it was doomed from the start. Just because I know something is unlikely to happen doesnt mean I shouldnt take action regardless. And really, I should absolutely not have had to raise this request, Tamzin had plenty of time to rethink their behaviour, they had plenty of time to acknowledge they were wrong, until the threat of having the ability to be an admin was taken away, there was no indication they were of a mind to listen to what far more experienced people had already told them. You seriously think I want to open a request, have my behaviour looked at? The reality of the situation is that anyone who does put a request up, accepted or declined, opens themselves up for significant potential hurt. Look at how quick Tamzin was to accuse me of being an anonymous EE mobile IP address (which 2 minutes checking should have indicated why that was a ridiculous accusation). Hell you could have always surprised me and said yes. But that would require Arbcom do some checking yourselves into Tamzin's dubious and malleable justifications for their actions. But Arbcom doesnt do that, it waits for the evidence page to fill up. So no, I dont genuinely think you would have ever accepted this case. I do think Tamzin's behaviour wouldnt change without involvement from an authority that has the backing to genuinely stop and make them think. Regardless of the many outcomes this request fills, I still think you should accept the case. An admin who has to be strong-armed into reviewing their bad actions is not showing genuine understanding of why they are wrong, and its certainly not an indication they will change in the future. All it really indicates is they will do what they want regardless. So yes, I knew full well in that response, and even in opening this request in the first place, I would probably gather a fair bit of backlash. But really, if Arbcom want to chastise me for opening a case request I know isnt going to be accepted, you should be looking at the reasons why it had to be done in the first place. Which in this case is Tamzin's rigid act first, never reconsider later attitude towards their tool use. I would dearly love there to be a credible alternative venue for addressing Admin's use of tools (key word, credible, here) but you get it because you sit in the big chair. Tamzin doesnt understand: dispute resolution, de-escalation, blocking when involved, correct use of the deletion tool, and I would argue from their IP question they dont understand either IP's or our core policy on outing. That's enough for me to say they shouldnt be an admin. [[User:Only in death|Only in death does duty end]] ([[User talk:Only in death|talk]]) 15:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC) === Statement by Tamzin === | |||