[WikiEN-l] Re: 172 de-sysopped

Sat Mar 5 22:42:09 UTC 2005

Has 172 been "resysopped" in the absence of either an arbcomm or some other
community decision to "desyssop" him?

Andy

on 3/1/05 11:59 PM, Anthere at anthere9 at yahoo.com wrote:

> 
> 
> csherlock at ljh.com.au a écrit:
>> Poor, Edmund W wrote:
>> 
>>> I de-sysoped 172, as he seems to have managed to start Wikipedia's first
>>> Blocking War. The problem is, I haphazardly blocked 3 other admins too,
>>> and one of them's mad at me.
>>> 
>>> I wish Snowspinner had e-mailed me or met me in talk first; he's put in
>>> a RFA instead. Well, I can't say I didn't deserve it.
>>> It all has to do with the 3RR, sock-puppets and global warming. Any two
>>> of which is enough to push people's buttons in Our Town.
>>> 
>>> Or is it Peyton Place?
>>> 
>>> Ed Poor
>> 
>> 
>> Out of interest, was their an RFC filed on this administrator before
>> this action was carried out? Shouldn't there be a more transparent and
>> formal process in place when it comes to desysoping admins?
>> 
>> TBSDY
> 
> There is a clear process to desysop people; It is (ahum) on
> *technically* possible to developers and stewards.
> 
> Developers can do it in case of urgency.
> But normally it is done by stewards.
> The current stewards are
> 
> * Andre Engels (en, nl, de, fr, nds, ...)
> * Angela (en)
> * Anthere (fr, en)
> * ArnoLagrange (fr, eo, en, es, it, de, ...)
> * Daniel Mayer (en, es)
> * Fantasy (en, de, it, fr, es)
> * Karl Wick (en, es)
> * Looxix (fr, en, nl)
> 
> Stewards can set or remove status from anyone, on any projects. The
> transparency is ensured through the bureaucrat log on meta. Requests for
> status are also made on meta, publicly :
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions
> 
> Stewards are not supposed to desysoped anyone just because they feel
> like it; They do it after community agreement, and there is a sorta rule
> that a steward avoid doing so in his own language project (for example,
> Fantazy avoids desysoping people on german, and Mav would avoids on
> en... when it is a community decision, not a personal request...).
> 
> We desysoped a couple of people in the past year. Some on en, a serious
> lot on de, very recently on ja. And a good bunch of tired wikipedians in
> need of a break.
> 
> In short, except for urgency, no desysoping should take place on the
> english wikipedia without first arbcom decision.
> 
> Ed was able to do it essentially because he still had the developer
> flag. But he was not really supposed to do so.
> 
> The flag is now removed - not as a punishment - as it is not me to judge
> whether there was indeed urgency.
> But as a technical clean-up, as Ed is now not a developer any more.
> 
> I might add that Uncle Ed had held that role for a long time before
> stewards were elected : running sql queries to make people sysop or
> remove this status. So, I really do not hold grunge against him. All
> this is rather a mistake from us.
> 
> Anthere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l