User blog:SketchFalcon/The Truth About Admins and Rollbacks

So the past couple days I was perusing Wikipedia policy (don't ask me why), and though it's mind-numbingly boring, one section caught my mind: the section about requesting adminship.

While reading it, I began thinking about how adminship is treated here, and though it's not something we think about often, I've noticed on several recent threads and posts that many of us have the wrong idea about what admins and rollbacks are.

To start it off, I'll say the most fundamental piece:

HAVING ADMINSHIP DOES NOT MAKE YOU SPECIAL

Yes, this may be hard to realize, but it's true. Too often, we assume that admins are like the CEOs or managers of the wiki. This is not true at all. EVERYONE is in charge of this wiki, and it is only by decisions in open forum that we do anything here. To borrow from Wikipedia, admins are more like custodians. Think about it. Custodians are given the keys to every room in the building, which no one else has, even though they may be an important person in the organization inhabiting the building. The custodian is entrusted with powers that not everyone can have for obvious reasons, such as locking/unlocking doors and removing contaminants. However, he plays no bigger a part in what happens in the building than anyone else. He could take advantage of his privileges such as locking people out, but it would serve absolutely no purpose and he would just end up being fired.

Adminship is not a status that puts you "higher" than normal users. Instead it is extra responsibility for people who have shown themselves to be responsible enough to do things that are integral to the wiki, but which not everyone can do. And so, here are a few pointers:
 * Being an admin should not be "the final prize" for your work here. Adminship is not a prize at all. Instead, it is an increased commitment to help with the wiki. The only reason I requested adminship was because there were several pages needing deletion and other maintenance issues as well as a lack of active admins. The only benefit I have reaped is the knowledge that I can help the wiki in more ways, and to tell you the truth, administration is monotonous. Not that I don't like it, but the only admin-only things I do on a regular basis are mass deleting pages. Everything else everyone can do.
 * Admins' opinions are not of more worth than others: This is an issue I have come across multiple times here. I voice my opinion, and then people join in with me, silencing anyone who makes a strong argument against me because "I'm an admin, and I know best." Uh, no. A focal philosophy on Wikia is the fact that everyone has a say in matters, regardless of whether they are a bureaucrat with 20k edits or a contributor who just started last week. And you may not believe this, but admins are not always right. The general reason people hold us in high regard is because we have established ourselves as calm and reasonable talkers, which is one of the reasons why we were promoted. However, anyone can keep a cool head and form logical conclusions. I was well respected for this long before I was an admin, even before I was a Rollbacker. Which brings me to my next point. But no one is right all the time, including admins, which is why consensus, aka EVERYBODY'S opinion matters.
 * Non-admins can do nearly everything. They can settle a conflict between two users, they can fix bad edits done in good faith, and they can undo vandalism. These things are typically assiciated with admins, but in reality any user with a calm head, logical approach, and good intentions can do all these things. Admin powers are really only needed when something gets out of control, like an unrepentant vandal or a shown page. But those don't happen too often in comparison with the other scenarios.

So there you have it, "Admin Mythbusters." I encourage y'all to take a good look at this, especially if you have considered requesting adminship. I don't mean to scare you, but please know that this is the truth and it will benefit you in the long run. Are you doing everything a non-admin can do but know this site has issues that would be best be taken care of with admin tools? Great! It's just very important you know and understand your true intentions before proceeding.

Then there's Rollback, a position which may be even more bloated than admin. All Rollbackers can do is undo vandalism quicker. That is it. While they are recognized as "good editors" who are level headed enough to know what vandalism is, the range of their abilities is limited. As said before, ANY USER can undo vandalism. Rollbackers also should only use the rollback tool when it is clear and doubtless vandalism. If it is just a bad edit done in good faith, the undo button needs to be used, in order to provide an edit summary.

While we only have 2 active rollbackers at the moment and could certainly use more, the only point in becoming one is to counter vandalism more effectively, and thus a track record in undoing vandalism should be expected. IF YOU MAINLY EDIT IN BLOGS AND FORUMS, DO NOT REQUEST ROLLBACK. THERE IS NO WORTH IN DOING SO.

This does bring me to another issue, the one about rollbackers' names being highlighted in forums and blogs. I understand admins, so as to help new users locate us, but is there any point in highlighting rollbackers? Their tools so not extend outside articles. And while I can't prove it, I do have a feeling that the highlighted comment does give a sense of "status" in an area which doesn't really apply at all. Thoughts on this?

Well, that's all I have to say for now. What are your thoughts on this? Anything you agree/disagree with? Have something you think should be added? Share it in the contents! See y'all later.