Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Candidate statements/Ronline: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Simetrical (talk | contribs) Form questions: desysopping and IAR |
|||
Line 109:
== Form questions from [[User:Simetrical|Simetrical]] ==
#What's your opinion on desysopping as an ArbCom penalty?
:Well, it depends on how it's applied. I think it's a reasonable penalty if the case is centred on admin abuse. For example, if an admin has abused his/her function or does not have the character of an admin, desysopping is a much better penalty than, say, probation or blocking. [[Image:European flag.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] '''[[User:Ronline|Ronline]]''' [[User talk:Ronline|✉]] 04:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
#How closely do you think admins should have to follow policy when using their special powers?
—[[User:Simetrical|Simetrical]] ([[User talk:Simetrical|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Simetrical|contribs]]) 02:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
:I think admins should never use powers that go beyond policy, but that it's OK to use common sense if an admin feels that policy is too harsh. So, an admin should follow policy very closely and make sure that the powers they use don't abuse policy. However, I don't mind admins "underusing" their powers - i.e. applying more lenient blocks to users, ''if'' they feel these measures are justified. [[Image:European flag.svg|20px]][[Image:Flag of Romania.svg|20px]] '''[[User:Ronline|Ronline]]''' [[User talk:Ronline|✉]] 04:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
| |||