Amelia wrote:...
I just meant that the tone of this discussion is getting increasingly agressive (that's my sentiment) even if the line hasn't been crossed yet. ...
I suppose that you're right that this is a sensitive topic. It is for me at least, because of my personal philosophy on the matter.
But I feel the very nature of this thread to begin with has high probability of leading to such a discussion. To me, then, it comes down to asking whether this type of discussion is worth discussing... Because of my personal beliefs, I think that it is. You are correct, for example, that it's unlikely that any admin's actions will be changed. We've seen from past experience that this rarely occurs. But just because change is unlikely doesn't mean, in my view, that something is not worth discussing.
I've spent a lot of time on KGS, and I must admit, that I've been angry in the past at decisions by KGS admins. You could even say that I sometimes fundamentally disagree with them. Had I not had these experiences, I probably would not feel inclined to speak up when discussions of administration arise. In a way, I feel that this brings balance to a situation which would otherwise be tilted in the favor of the admins, who by definition have been given power.
I think that it's important to have such balance. When we always blindly accept decisions of admins, even when they make poor decisions, it's inevitable that poor decisions will continue to be made, and perhaps with greater frequency.
Balance is important. If we don't speak up in situations that matter to us, balance cannot be achieved.
