On 28 May 2010, at 18:13, c h wrote: > IMHO, etc... > > The fundamental problem is the difficulty in *removing* SysOp, which *makes* > it a big deal. > > If it really was no big deal, RfA wouldn't need to be such an ordeal; if a > user is competent, reasonably experienced and no DRAMA, we should +SysOp them > (AGF). If they fuck up, remove it (No big deal).
Is this really true? This certainly describes how I view adminship... (although this might explain why I don't understand WP:RfA nowadays...) > We block our precious new users at the drop of a hat, but an admin has to do > something pretty damned horrific to even consider removing their status, and > even then it takes months. This depends on what you define as 'pretty damned horrific". I'd say that it's currently more that they have to do something high-profile (e.g. vandalise the main page) or controversial. > Imagine if it worked more like blocking - if an admin fucks up, remove their > SysOp and have a chat about it. "Hi, I noticed that you speedy-deleted some > files that do not appear to meet the CSD criteria; your SysOp staus has been > removed _while we discuss it_". No big deal, the admins shouldn't mind. This would depend on how many files it was that were deleted - one or two, it's easier to AGF and discuss it with them / undo their deletions for a bit. Something more systematic is a bigger issue, worth discussing at higher levels, and possibly temporarily removing adminship (although it might be lower key to just remove the ability do delete files for a bit, if such a thing could be done by another admin rather than involving a sysop). Of course, files can be undeleted, so it's not normally a big issue (except on Commons) - I'd view the big issue as being needlessly blocking people, who then leave Wikipedia without returning... Mike Peel _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
