UDWiki:Administration/Policy Discussion/Re-Evaluating Re-Evaluations and Other Sysopness

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.

Preamble

Some recent (and old) discussion on changes to the A/RE system, 'crats, and maybe other stuff warrants a policy discussion. Here are some pointers/options discussed around the wiki:

• No more automatic A/REs.

1. Only do A/RE when misconduct case appears.
2. Only do A/RE when community calls for it.
3. Only do A/RE when the sysop submits themself for it.
4. Only do A/RE when sysop is about to be Truly Inactive.
5. Only do annual A/RE for all sysops at once.
6. No more A/REs. Sysop (more-or-less) for life.

• Still automatic A/REs.

1. Perhaps less frequent A/REs.

• Make all sysops bureaucrats.

1. Only those sysops with over one year of sysopness.
2. Just make all sysops bureaucrats.
3. At least have fewer bureaucrat elections.
4. Make more sysops, but not all, bureaucrats.

• Make more users sysops.

1. An old suggestion, but some have suggested a lower threshold for making people sysops.

The general rationale for these changes is that the A/RE and A/BP process is annoying and needless as-is.

Feel free to talk on the talk page, or add a suggestion here if you want to be more assertive. Feel free to suggest changes in other rules for sysops and bureaucrats if it makes these or other changes more palatable.

Policy Change Proposed

1. All sysops will be re-evaluated on Urban Dead's Birthday, July the 3rd.

   Voting period will be extended from one week to two weeks to accommodate the mass of sysops and voters during a potentially busy time.

2. Bureaucrat voting will occur once every six months, on June the 1st and December the 1st.

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. Author. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:50, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
2. Yes this Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 01:08, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

   Also, I assume that passage would trigger the first double-election this December 1st? Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 17:32, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

   Sure, unless someone comes up with a compelling reason not to at that time. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:09, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

   So I get an early chance to trick Aichon into replacing me? Where do I sign? -- Spiderzed▋ 22:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

3. Author. (I'm assuming both crat seats are up for grabs at the same time?) --Rosslessness^{Want to complete a dangerous mission?} 11:40, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

   Ah... yes? Yes. If that's the case we'll need to tweak the wording for the "in case of a tie" clause. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 14:36, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

4. Make UD-Wiki Great Again! -- Spiderzed▋ 11:58, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
5. Less red tape is better. --hagnat 14:06, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
6. Yep. And I'll give my approval in advance for a modification to make it clearer that both 'crats are up at the same time. —Aichon— 15:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

   Careful. We might sneak in a footnote clause that specifically forbids you from ever withdrawing from the crat vote while we are at it. -- Spiderzed▋ 18:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC) 1 person likes this comment.

   Which is exactly why I only gave my preemptive approval for that one, specific change, and not a blanket approval for any changes. ;) —Aichon— 20:31, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

7. I endorse this product/service. -- Cheese 17:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
8. Da. Linkthewindow  Talk  09:10, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
9. farts dust--User:Sexualharrison14:37, 28 November 2015
10. Yes except we should just have sysops be bureaucrats and eliminate all that drama. --Uroguy^TMZ 16:49, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Against

1. Moving all the pointless automatic A/REs to one time period doesn't change that they are pointless. --_K^CLZA_NecroConnect 23:46, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

   Agreed. --Father 19:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

2. If the "general rationale for these changes is that the A/RE and A/BP process is annoying and needless as-is" then I don't see the proposed policy change addressing this. Get rid of the automatic A/REs. --Father 19:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

   "As-is" refers to the policy as-is, meaning doing A/REs individually for each sysop every 8 months. This was deemed pointless, although people still want an A/RE mechanism. It was suggested that we only do A/REs as-needed, however people were concerned about the mechanism for calling an A/RE. What's suggested here is an A/RE that is less frequent (12 months) and done all at once, making it a total of 2 weeks each year for A/RE rather than usually 7 weeks. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

   So... this policy does address the concerns you have, but not all the way. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:13, 23 November 2015 (UTC)