Board Thread:Community Voting/@comment-4257955-20150306000303/@comment-25995065-20150306044334

Jdude420 wrote: Also 'banning' Admins from discussing certain topics on the Admin site seems rather ridiculous..., what's wrong with bringing something up, discussing it a bit, then bringing it to the community for input/authorization? "Banning" admins from discussing certain topics is not what I proposed. I suggested that some guidelines on what should/shouldn't be discussed (Brickipedia's admin wiki guidelines are written solely in the form of what shouldn't be discussed), to allow for some more responsibility from the admins and some more trust from the rest of the community. Such guidelines can make users feel more comfortable in what is being discussed "behind their back", not having to worry whether or not admins are discussing anything that could impact that user at any given time. For example, this point from Brickipedia's admin wiki guidelines can assure users that Brickipedia admins aren't going to start listing a ton of reasons why they hate some user and then come to some agreement to single-out, block, or have any shared bias against some user: "[The admin wiki should not] Be used to discuss other users - If you have an issue with another user, then it should be dealt with on their talk page at Brickipedia. If you are afraid it might hurt their feelings, then maybe you shouldn't be discussing it."

This doesn't mean you can't do anything the guidelines say against, and there's nothing that can be enforced about it. It's a guideline, not a law. But it does advise that, in the particular example above, that you don't start discussing users behind their back. Having these sorts of guidelines simply provides some trust from the community for their admins.