[WikiEN-l] Re: RickK leaving: adminship has become much more than "no big deal" and that's poisonous

Tue Jun 21 10:54:39 UTC 2005

Alphax a écrit:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

>>If we truly want to live up to the perception and ideal that
>>adminship is "no big deal", it should be a matter of routine to
>>revoke admin priviledges for a few hours for something as little as a
>>single foul mouthed comment, even if provoked and egged on by peers.
>>If this is done, perhaps we will see less admins defending their
>>actions at any cost, and more "shrugging it off" and proceeding with
>>business.
>>
> 
> 
> Indeed; at present, it takes the intervention of a steward (which I've
> always thought of as being comparable to a Herculean effort) for someone
> to have admin priveleges removed; even so, it must be at the request of
> said admin, or the result of an RfAr, or something equally vile. For
> example, there are several Wikipedians on en who are listed as
> "missing", and yet still have their mystical powers. Who knows what
> would happen if they ever returned. I agree that admins should be
> elected, and elected by the community; but reading the votes at RfA
> gives me the feeling that members of the Cabal are elected by the Cabal,
> for the Cabal, and Cabal memebership is some kind of certificate you
> hang on your wall, much like a diploma. Yes, you can lose it, but it
> requires breaking, entering, pillaging, and arson.

Asking a steward to remove sysop status is not an Herculean effort at 
all. We are numerous enough so that you can find one within an hour at 
most. So, if you want hurry action, I think it is fine.

The Herculean effort comes from the fact you may not remove a sysop 
status without a full set a actions, so complicated, bureaucratic and 
generally upsetting... that you just do not do it :-)

I would recommand some rules I proposed more than a year ago on meta. I 
believe a few projects follow them as well.  There are two ideas

* an editor is gone, does not edit any more  ---> he will be removed 
sysop status. If he needs them back, he can ask and sysop position is 
granted back pretty easily. But we do not pretend we have 600 sysops 
while only 100 are active.

* an editor must be lightly confirmed once a year. Without making a big 
mess of it. If several people question the status, it will just be removed.

No fuss. Only one person complained in 1 year, not because he was 
desysoped, but because we did not tell him he was desysoped... but 
actually, I just did not think of telling him at all... as I think any 
one asking to be an admin on a project... should know the rules of 
adminship on this project. On meta, you can give up, ask again, get 
temporary status, lose or regain sysop power very quickly and 
painlessly. We just avoid making a big fuss of it.

So, I do not think stewards is the problem. Only habits are. Maybe you 
need to change these habits.

ant