Forum:Assume good faith

After I received my administrator rights, I proceeded to do what I had seen many other administrators do: protect my profile. It seemed like an "admin-ly" sort of action, so I guessed I might as well follow suit. However, once I protected my profile, a thought struck me: Does this violate our policy?

The only reason I have seen an administrator protect his or her profile is to protect it from vandalism. What purpose does that serve? If it's vandalized, you can rollback the edit(s) with just a click. It's nothing but a minor inconvenience that probably won't cause much trouble at all. Besides, it gives you a free edit. ^_^

The reason I find that protecting one's own profile violates our policy is because we should assume good faith. This is written in our policy, but its meaning is not specified. There are several definitions I have seen, but I believe Wikipedia sums it up perfectly here.

''Unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, assume that people are trying to help. Don't assume that someone will make "bad" edits.''

So what am I proposing? I suggest that the definition of assuming good faith be officially defined as the Wikipedia definition of assuming good faith. I also propose that administrators set an example by not assuming that someone will come along and vandalize their profiles.

-- Shadowunleashed13 (talk) 23:44, June 2, 2013 (UTC)