User:9cfilorux/walk on both sides

This is redundant to WP:INVOLVED and will probably just fill your head with excess blathering.

---

A user's roles as sysop and editor must be kept absolutely separate. As a sysop you watch things passively from behind a wall of sorts and only step in when some kind of intervention is needed; as an editor you engage with other editors in front of the wall. You have to be careful not to walk on both sides of the wall at once. At once, in this case, means that you have walked on both sides in a single dispute or discussion. If you have !voted in a deletion discussion in front, you may not go in back and close the discussion; if you have been involved with a user in front, you may not go in back and block or unblock that user.

Continuing with the wall analogy, the reason for this is that if you walk on both sides you risk representing opinions found in front with your actions in back. Administrative actions, those made by a sysop in back, must represent all sides of the editorial dispute in front, and if you have taken one side you cannot be sure of representing all of them.

There is probably greater emphasis on this in Wikipedia because neutrality of content is one of the core principles, and for content to be neutral those who decide what happens to it and to those who write it must be neutral as well. Wikipedia may be largely about truth, but an important part of this is that there is no single right answer to all situations, no catch-all statement of what must happen when, no unifying concept beyond being a free encyclopedia. The closest thing to a right answer is in the sources; the rest is left to the imagination of the community.

In summary, on any wiki where the unifying concept is even slightly open to interpretation, there should be a wall between sysops and editors, and no sysop should walk on both of its sides at the same time.