Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote in part:
Delirium wrote:
>This will probably be opposed by those who'll
see it as just another
>step into hierarchical organization, but I think it might be a good idea
>to create a new, more-inclusive class of users, that has authoritative
>significance but no technical powers. Basically any user who has been
>here for some period of time (maybe 2-3 weeks or so), and shown
>him/herself to be editing in good faith.
How is this different from the requirements for sysophood?
Jimbo is always trying to convince us that sysophood is no big deal,
and that we restrict it only for technical reasons because it's so powerful.
Now at the other end of things, maybe at this point on
the English
wikipedia we have enough sysops in attendance at any one time, that it
would not be unreasonable to require two concurring sysops to perform
sysopactions which are uncommonly needed but potentially particularly
controversial. I am thinking about unprotection of pages and undeletion
as well.
Undeletion should never require more official validation than deletion.
-- Toby