View source for UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Truly Inactive Sysops

{{Policy Document|Truly Inactive Sysops}}
{{Protect}}

=== Summary ===
*A sysop that hasn't made any edit in '''four''' months is considered to be inactive and demoted from sysop status to normal user status.
*This demotion is not considered a detriment to any future request for sysop status.
*This policy does not effect any account that [[User:Kevan|Kevan]] may use as a wiki admin account.

=== Rules of demotion ===
*A sysop that hasn't made any edit in '''four''' months will be warned, on their talk page, by a Bureaucrat, that they face demotion of their sysop powers in one week, if they remain inactive.
*One week after the warning has been placed, dependant on the actions of the sysop, the Bureaucrat will decide whether or not to carry out the demotion.  
:*This is to avoid, for example, the unlikely case of a sysop simply making a single edit with the aim of avoiding the demotion.
:*The Bureaucrat is trusted and bound to make a fair decision, and not to demote a sysop who clearly demonstrates a return to activity on the wiki.
::*Any demonstrable abuse of this power by a Bureaucrat, however unlikely, could (as with any other abuse of specific powers) be grounds for a Misconduct case.  
*If the sysop makes no response at all to the warning, they must be demoted.

=== Effect ===
*According to statistics (provided [[UDWiki_talk:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Inactive_Sysops#Much_Ado_About_Inactive_Sysops|here]]) this policy, if passed, would immediately effect the following six sysops (with their last edit date shown in brackets):
:*BobHammero (30 October 2006)
:*Brizth (8 April 2007)
:*Morlock (23 September 2005)
:*Novelty (5 December 2006)
:*SA-TA-EK-Rumisiel (10 April 2007)
:*Spiro (28 April 2006)     
*That would result in a remainder of twenty sysops (discounting Kevan-alts), of varying degrees of current activity.  (In general terms, only eleven are active as of 2008.)
*It is likely that a further two sysops would be effected in mid-February (i.e. LibrarianBrent and Max Grivas).
*There is currently the potential for a further seven demotions to occur in mid to late April.

=== Sysop Hiatus ===
*It may be that a sysop knows in advance that they'll be taking a hiatus from this wiki.
*Any sysop may extend the '''four''' month period this policy operates with to '''six''' months, by placing the following <nowiki>{{SysopHiatus}}</nowiki> template at the top of their user page or talk page:


{{SysopHiatus}}

=== Purpose ===
*To rid the sysop list of any long-term inactive users.
:*This may promote the take up of new sysops as voters realise that there are less active sysops than the [[Special:Listusers/sysop|full list]] implies.
*This policy does not purport to judge whether or not a sysop is currently engaged in sysop-specific duties, but only whether they are active generally.
*This policy is not meant as a punishment, but instead a simple housekeeping task.

=== Note ===
*This policy was heavily influenced by, inspired by and drawn from the recently failed [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Inactive_Sysops|Inactive Sysops]] policy.

==Voting Section==
{{PolicyVotingRules}}

===For===
# {{User:Nalikill/Sig}} 22:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''For''' --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
# Yep, Keep, Vouch. Deals with those who are gone, not just a bit lazy. Plus it doesn't treat inactivity as a crime.--{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 22:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
# Thanks to all on the discussion page for helpful advice in tidying this up. --<span style="font-size:90%">[[User:Funt Solo|Funt Solo]]</span> <sup style="font-size:70%">[[Mod_Conspiracy|QT]]</sup> [[Image:Scotland flag.JPG|18px]] 22:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
#Inactive sysops lose Mod stats.  Seems good.  And also does seem to prevent a hacker from hacking those inactive accounts and terrorizing the wiki with mod powers... --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 22:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
# Yes, it would seem best to start doing this when it comes to inactive sysops.--[[User:Jamie Cantwell3|Jamie Cantwell3]] 23:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
# It's a bit pointless, but it can't hurt. --[[User:Cyberbob240|Cyberbob]] <sup>[[DORIS]] [[CGR]] [[Project UnWelcome|U!]]</sup> 23:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
# tidies things up without victimizing anyone! --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 00:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# why should they have powers if they dont use em?--{{User:Blood Panther/Sig}} 01:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# --{{User:The Surgeon General/sig}} 01:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# It makes sense to me. --{{User:Pedentic/Sig}} 02:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#i'm a sycophant--{{User:AnimeSucks/Sig}} 03:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# I cant complain about this --[[User:Grim_s|The Grimch]] <sup>[[Project UnWelcome|U!]] [[Project Evil|E!]] [[We are Trolls!|WAT!]]</sup> 04:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# Looks good, as there are a number of safe-guards in place for those SysOps who get temporarily burnt-out, or tied up w/ RL commitments/obligations. --{{User:Canker Sore/Siggy}} 04:56 16 January (UTC)
#'''For''' - I actually think it could be stronger but it's a start.--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 06:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#--[[User:Duke Garland|<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>]] [[LCD|<nowiki>[</nowiki>]][[User talk:Duke Garland|talk]][[Signature Race|<nowiki>]</nowiki>]] 07:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''For''' - Looks good to me. --[[User:Amanu Jaku|Amanu Jaku]] 09:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''For''' --{{User:Midianian/Sig}} 10:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# I liked the [[UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Inactive Sysops|last one]], and I like this one, too.  --<small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;background:#ffffff;padding:1px;">[[User:Zombie slay3r|<b><span style="color:#0000cd;">Z. slay3r</span></b>]] • [[User_talk:Zombie slay3r|<span style="background-color:#0000fa;color:#ffffff">&nbsp;Talk&nbsp;</span>]]</span></small> 13:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''For''' - Well done --[[User:Ryiis|Ryiis]] 14:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#Hmm. I wouldn't be completely for this, but on occasion people do seem to say things along the lines of "we have enougth sysops already" on the promotions bid, then someone else comes along saying how many of them are inactive, blah blah blah... So I'm voting for this just to get all that cleared up, apart from anything else.--{{User:Seventythree/Sig}} 17:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# I agree--[[User:MisterGame|MisterGame]] 18:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''For'''- this seems reasonable [[User:Scotw|Scotw]] 19:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# Seems like a legit house-keeping action. If users can re-apply to become sysops when they return, there's no reason to be offended by this act passing. [[User:Dray|Dray]] 19:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#--[[User:Toejam|Toejam]] 22:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# We should also create a category for inactive Sysops perhaps as well, so at a glance we can see who is active and who is not? --{{User:Dux Ducis/sig}} 22:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#:That can easily be included into the template.--<small>[[User:Karek|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 22:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
#::That crossed my mind. --{{User:Dux Ducis/sig}} 00:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
#--{{User:Suicidalangel/Sig}} 00:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
#This is needed- [[User:Vantar|Vantar]] 00:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
#Ok. - [[User:Whitehouse|Whitehouse]] <sup>[[User_talk:Whitehouse|T]]</sup> 15:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
#Someone who isn't active for FOUR MONTHS doesn't deserve to be a sysop. --{{User:Hhal/Sig}} 22:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
# Ok. --[[User:BoboKilledMe | BKM]] 03:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''For''' [[User:Asheets|Asheets]] 20:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
# <small>-- [[User:Boxy|boxy]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|talk]] • [[UDWiki:Image Categorisation|i]]</sup> 00:26 26 January 2008 (BST)</small>
# - A step in the right direction. --[[User:Akule|Akule]] <sup>School's in session. </sup> 17:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

===Against===
# i refuse to accept that we should demote users based on their lack of activity in this wiki. --{{User:Hagnat/sig}} 17:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
# i agree.----[[User:Sexualharrison|Sexualharrison]][[Image:Starofdavid2.png | 18px]] [[Image:Boobs.gif|18px]] 05:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
#Pointless.--{{User:Thari/sig}} 18:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
#As above.--[[User:ShadowScope|ShadowScope]] 20:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''Against''' - As above...--[[User:WOOT|/~Rakuen~\]] 02:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
#'''Against''' Stupid waste of time. --[[User:Rogue|Rogue]] 04:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


----

'''Voting closed'''. Policy approved. 34 For, 6 Against. (85% majority.) --<span style="font-size:90%">[[User:Funt Solo|Funt Solo]]</span> <sup style="font-size:70%">[[Mod_Conspiracy|QT]]</sup> [[Image:Scotland flag.JPG|18px]] 23:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)