UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Automatic Bureaucrat Cycling

Guidelines — Policy Document This page is a statement of official UDWiki Policies and Rules. See Policy Discussion for policy additions and changes.

Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Automatic Bureaucrat Cycling

Overview

One Bureaucrat position will come up for re-election by the wiki community every 3 months, in rotation.

Any Bureaucrat who goes inactive on the wiki for 1 full month will automatically be demoted back to Sysops status, and the position put up for re-election, if a replacement is deemed necessary by the wiki community.

The proposed rule changes

Rules for starting an election.

1. When a Bureaucrat resigns, or loses his status due to demotion or inactivity an election is started immediately.
   • A Bureaucrat that hasn't made a single edit in one month is considered as inactive and forfeits his status as bureaucrat.
2. After 3 months with no elections on a bureaucrat position, an election is called for the bureaucrat position longest without an election.
3. If, for any reason, an individual Bureaucrat position hasn't faced an election after 12 months, then an election is called after that period.
4. The election ends after two weeks wiki time counting from the when the election is started.
5. The candidate with the most votes votes wins the election.
6. In the event of a tied vote the remaining bureaucrats will decide between the tied candidates.

Rules concerning candidates

1. All active users with the sysops status are automatically declared candidates for any vacant Bureaucrat positions.
   • Users with at least 12 edits in the 30 days before the election are considered "active" for purposes of the election
2. The Bureaucrat whose position comes up for election if said election is started under rule 2 of Rules for starting an election is automatically declared a candidate.
3. A candidate can retract his own candidacy at any time.

Rules concerning voting.

1. All users have only one vote per bureaucrat position to be filled.
2. Users vote for a candidate by signing under the preferred candidates name.
3. Users may change their votes for a candidate as long as the election has not ended.
   • Multiple votes at the same time will be struck.
4. Sockpuppetry is considered vandalism.

Summary

This policy confirms and streamlines the majority of the march 2007 round rules as the formal rules for choosing bureaucrats, and introduces two new additions:

• One Bureaucrat position will come up for re-election by the wiki community every 3 months, in rotation.
• Any Bureaucrat who goes inactive on the wiki for 1 full month will automatically be demoted back to Sysops status, and the position put up for re-election, if a replacement is deemed necessary by the wiki community.

This policy does not affect any account that Kevan may use as a wiki admin account.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, signed, and timestamped. They can take one of two forms: # comments ~~~~ or # ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above will be struck by a sysop.

The only valid voting sections are For and Against. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

For

1. We need a way to replace bureaucrats as they move on -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 15:17, 8 April 2007 (BST)
2. Makes the whole process less happenstance and more democratic.--Vista 15:21, 8 April 2007 (BST)
3. A useful proposition.It has my vote.--Kamden 16:43, 8 April 2007 (BST)
4. --Darth Sensitive ^W! 21:05, 8 April 2007 (BST)
5. Recycling is good. --^T 21:10, 8 April 2007 (BST)
6. Just one question: does this mean we will have a third Bureaucrat replacing BobHammero? I think three are too many... --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 00:13, 9 April 2007 (BST)
7. --Thegreathal 02:20, 9 April 2007 (BST) Ohhh yeah.
8. --Hubrid Nox ^{Sys WTF U! B!} 02:23, 9 April 2007 (BST)
9. Jonny12 ^{talk . w(m)^∞} 13:26, 9 April 2007 (BST)
10. --Mayor Fitting 01:42, 10 April 2007 (BST)
11. Jedaz^{ΣT MC ΞD GIS S! 01:01, 10 April 2007 (GMT)}
12. -Bullgod 02:22, 10 April 2007 (BST)
13. --Pyrranha 04:22, 10 April 2007 (BST)
14. I have seen a tired and annoyed 'crat, and it was not pretty. Or lovely.--Lachryma^☭ 04:48, 10 April 2007 (BST)
15. Just because gage voted against, I'm For this.--Thari ^{TжFedCom is BFI!} 06:49, 10 April 2007 (BST)
16. --Funt Solo 16:08, 10 April 2007 (BST)
17. I see no reason why not.--'STER-Talk-Mod^P! 20:36, 10 April 2007 (BST)
18. Democratic fairness. --Toejam 23:52, 10 April 2007 (BST)
19. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 15:03, 11 April 2007 (BST)
20. Why not? --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 21:24, 12 April 2007 (BST)
21. Sounds good Vantar 21:07, 18 April 2007 (BST)
22. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 13:17, 20 April 2007 (BST)
23. Auch aye - Cheeseman ^W!ASBTalk 23:17, 20 April 2007 (BST)
24. Seems fairly straightforward and uncontentiousCrabappleslegalteam 01:12, 21 April 2007 (BST)
25. I can't find anything I don't like about this policy --Humuhumuhumu...Ted 01:50, 21 April 2007 (BST)

Against

1. I'm just here to be contrary and ornery.--Gage 06:46, 10 April 2007 (BST)
2. This just seems like an explicit rule for what should be fairly obvious procedure. Another bold step down the road of bureaucratic insanity and rule creep. --Zaruthustra^Mod 23:21, 20 April 2007 (BST)