SmashWiki talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
SmashWiki talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 1 (view source)
Revision as of 19:39, August 22, 2008
, 16 years ago→New Idea for All Sysops: my response
(→New Idea for All Sysops: my response) |
|||
| Line 169: | Line 169: | ||
:Will do; thanks for the suggestion. – [[User:Defiant Elements|<font color="black">Defiant Elements</font>]] 21:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC) | :Will do; thanks for the suggestion. – [[User:Defiant Elements|<font color="black">Defiant Elements</font>]] 21:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
:EDIT: I've emailed Angela. – [[User:Defiant Elements|<font color="black">Defiant Elements</font>]] 21:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC) | :EDIT: I've emailed Angela. – [[User:Defiant Elements|<font color="black">Defiant Elements</font>]] 21:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
=== Arbitrary page break === | |||
Since I was asked for my thoughts, I thought I'd go on the record with them. I don't support this proposal as suggested, specifically because it would be mandatory for all sysops. I am not aware of any policy on this wiki, on Wikia, or even on Wikipedia that would subject sysops to a mandatory recall. (Sysops on Wikipedia can be removed, but only by an elected panel of higher-ups, as I understand it.) Given that, I don't think it's fair to institute such a policy without some consensus at least among sysops, which there is not. It's also unclear as to what policy would be used to determine the success of a reconfirmation--the current policy leaves things up to whether "consensus" is reached, and proposed policies would either work purely on votes received (one that has its share of opponents, and one which I oppose myself on the basis that it's too much like a popularity contest) or on the determination of a bureaucrat (which would be difficult to do if the bureaucrats are also being recalled). | |||
I also feel compelled to point out a few other things: one, not even bureaucrats can desysop people. Contacting Wikia staff is the only way of removing a sysop for whatever reason, so since that seems to be happening now anyway, I'm inclined to let that process work itself out. Also, a number of sysops are currently inactive. Much like there is no policy to allow sysops to be recalled by other users (other than noted above), there is no policy here/on Wikia/Wikipedia that I am aware of that would let people be demoted for simple inactivity. Even though the intent of this proposal is to remove abusive sysops, I don't think the collateral damage is justified. | |||
Ultimately this proposal essentially removes all sysops and just offers them a chance to get their jobs back the same way as anyone else. (There is no difference between a non-sysop going through the RfA process and not getting promoted if they fail, and a sysop going through the RfA process again and being stripped of their powers if they fail.) The fact that sysops naturally are inclined to make enemies in the proper course of their jobs (I'm speaking generally here, on the basis that people typically don't like it when they/their friends are punished) just means that they would be less likely to succeed, depending on how exactly the reconfirmation process was handled. The one saving grace I will offer is this: if people are really more interested in being able to "strengthen the positions of admins who re-win their status" rather than demote those who may have fallen out of favor (for whatever reason), then feel free to convince your favorite sysop to opt-in to this process. But I don't think it would be reasonable to implement this on a mandatory basis. --[[User:Kirby King|<font color="red"><b><i>Kirby King</i></b></font>]] 23:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC) | |||