UDWiki talk:Administration/Policy Discussion/Reevaluation for Bureaucrats: Difference between revisions
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→Simple: response) |
(→Simple: I was away from the wiki for a while prior to my current flurry of activity, so I could have missed something...) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:Since there are only two bureaucrats, each position will have an election every six/seven months (seven includes the two weeks of voting per election). The 12 months bit was a failsafe, in the event that something occurred that caused havok with the bureaucrat elections (say the addition of a third crat). In the event of a third bureaucrat position, then you are talking about 10 months cycle, which still fits in under the 12 month range. --{{User:Akule/sig}} 21:11, 5 May 2011 (BST) | :Since there are only two bureaucrats, each position will have an election every six/seven months (seven includes the two weeks of voting per election). The 12 months bit was a failsafe, in the event that something occurred that caused havok with the bureaucrat elections (say the addition of a third crat). In the event of a third bureaucrat position, then you are talking about 10 months cycle, which still fits in under the 12 month range. --{{User:Akule/sig}} 21:11, 5 May 2011 (BST) | ||
::It was overlooked in the Sysop Re-evaluation cycle change not the 'crat voting policy.The issue is 'crats going through standard re-evaluation while still 'crats.--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 21:45, 5 May 2011 (BST) | ::It was overlooked in the Sysop Re-evaluation cycle change not the 'crat voting policy.The issue is 'crats going through standard re-evaluation while still 'crats.--<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 21:45, 5 May 2011 (BST) | ||
:::Bureaucrats shouldn't be going through Re-valuation due to [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Sysop_Reevaluations#Bureaucrats_and_Re-evaluations|the following]]: | |||
:::{{divquote||The bureaucrat's promotions process is in essence a re-evaluation of a sysop by the community. Bureaucrats go through regular process of re-elections, so each time they are elected, the community is renewing their faith in the sysop, and is not subject to re-evaluation through this policy. When a bureaucrat is not re-elected and becomes a sysop again, then the sysop is again available for re-evaluation through this policy. When this happens, the bureaucrat's eight months start from when they were promoted to bureaucrat.}} | |||
:::and {{divquote||Current bureaucrats are exempt from this review process due to [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Automatic_Bureaucrat_Cycling|their own review process]].}} | |||
:::Or is there another policy which modified the [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Sysop_Reevaluations|Sysop Re-evaluations]] policy? --{{User:Akule/sig}} 22:06, 5 May 2011 (BST) | |||
Revision as of 21:06, 5 May 2011
Simple
Does anything really need to be said about this? Simple change to fix something overlooked when sysop evaluations were implemented. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 03:37, 4 May 2011 (BST)
- I don't think it was overlooked (I think more trust was placed in them, hence why it was that way), but I do agree that 8 months makes more sense. —Aichon— 06:54, 4 May 2011 (BST)
- +1 --Rosslessness 10:43, 5 May 2011 (BST)
- It wasn't overlooked, as:
| said: |
| After 3 months with no elections on a bureaucrat position, an election is called for the bureaucrat position longest without an election. |
- Since there are only two bureaucrats, each position will have an election every six/seven months (seven includes the two weeks of voting per election). The 12 months bit was a failsafe, in the event that something occurred that caused havok with the bureaucrat elections (say the addition of a third crat). In the event of a third bureaucrat position, then you are talking about 10 months cycle, which still fits in under the 12 month range. --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 21:11, 5 May 2011 (BST)
- It was overlooked in the Sysop Re-evaluation cycle change not the 'crat voting policy.The issue is 'crats going through standard re-evaluation while still 'crats.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 21:45, 5 May 2011 (BST)
- Bureaucrats shouldn't be going through Re-valuation due to the following:
- It was overlooked in the Sysop Re-evaluation cycle change not the 'crat voting policy.The issue is 'crats going through standard re-evaluation while still 'crats.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 21:45, 5 May 2011 (BST)
| said: |
| The bureaucrat's promotions process is in essence a re-evaluation of a sysop by the community. Bureaucrats go through regular process of re-elections, so each time they are elected, the community is renewing their faith in the sysop, and is not subject to re-evaluation through this policy. When a bureaucrat is not re-elected and becomes a sysop again, then the sysop is again available for re-evaluation through this policy. When this happens, the bureaucrat's eight months start from when they were promoted to bureaucrat. |
- and
| said: |
| Current bureaucrats are exempt from this review process due to their own review process. |
- Or is there another policy which modified the Sysop Re-evaluations policy? --Akule Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™ 22:06, 5 May 2011 (BST)
