-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Michael Turley wrote: Stewards are global. They can set arbitrary permissions on anyone in any Wikimedia wiki. There's a reason that this is not given to every random bureaucrat. :-) I see no reason for there to be a greater prevalence of stewards (we just had a large-ish selection of new ones); the need to remove people's sysop or bureaucrat flags is very rare. Yours sincerely, - -- James D. Forrester Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] E-Mail : james(a)jdforrester.org IM (MSN) : jamesdforrester(a)hotmail.com

On 9/19/05, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote: That isn't a result of not having enough stewards. Stewards have the ability to give any user adminship on other wikis, but they do not have that access level themselves, so can not just edit site notices. The reason these stayed up too long was that no one noticed and asked for adminship in order to remove them. Stewards should not be confused with global admins (which don't exist on Wikimedia). Angela.

Due to a widespread confusion regarding the application of IAR as a policy, rather than simply an informal guideline, I propose deleting the third leg of the so-called policy trifecta. NPOV was always the prime directive, and some tussles we came up with the word "civility"(*) to shape a good secondary. The third leg, although necessary to satisfy the requirements of standing furniture and designated "trifecta" was never quite as clear. Perhaps we should vote if there is actually a third, and if so what that should be. Drawing from a list of actual policy, of course and not just this "flimsy whimsy trumps policy history" nonsense. SV * http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-October/007069.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

It's never been a very widely applicable rule, but it's not our custom to delete policy pages with which we happen to disagree. Just pop something at the top to say it isn't an official policy or guideline, if you disagree with it.

Does IAR not have significant consensus as a guideline? On 9/19/05, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa(a)gmail.com> wrote:

steve v wrote: Let's not. Sometimes it's the only thing that protects us from anal lawyers. Ec