|
|
| Line 2: |
Line 2: |
| {{Administrationnav}} | | {{Administrationnav}} |
| {{Re-evaluations Intro}} | | {{Re-evaluations Intro}} |
| | | ==Re-Evaluations Being Discussed== |
| ==Re-Evaluations still open for discussion== | |
| <!-- | | <!-- |
| ''There are currently no open Re-Evaluations.'' | | ''There are currently no open Re-Evaluations.'' |
| --> | | --> |
|
| |
|
| | ==Recent Re-Evaluations== |
| | |
| | The 2020 Re-Evaluations have begun. They will go for 2 weeks and end on 09:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC). |
|
| |
|
| ==Re-Evaluations still needing to be processed==
| | Please provide your opinions of the sysops undergoing evaluation below. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 09:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC) |
| | :The re-evaluation comment period has now elapsed. Please hold while our beloved Crats decide our fates. {{User:Bob Moncrief/Sig}} 13:59, 23 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| <!--''There are currently no Re-Evaluations to be processed.''-->
| | ===Bob Moncrief=== |
| ''There are currently no Re-Evaluations to be processed.'' | | {{bid|Bob Moncrief|RE}} |
| | *'''Vouch''' - Still foolish enough to carry workload in this dying place. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 16:19, 10 July 2020 (UTC) |
| | *'''Vouch''' - I endorse the product/service. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 17:25, 21 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| ==Recent Re-evaluations== | | ===Rosslessness=== |
| <!--
| | {{bid|Rosslessness|RE}} |
| ''There have been no recent re-evaluations'' | | *'''Vouch''' - Ceux qui n’ont pas connu l’ancien régime ne pourront jamais savoir ce qu’était la douceur de vivre. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 16:19, 10 July 2020 (UTC) |
| --> | | *'''Vouch''' - I endorse the product/service. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 17:25, 21 July 2020 (UTC) |
| ===User:Red Hawk One===
| |
| {{bid|Red Hawk One}} | |
|
| |
|
| Looks like he won't make it in time to put himself up, so lest his A/RE comes up too late, I'm doing it. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 20:18, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| | ===Stelar=== |
| *'''Vouch''' - RHO may not be the most active sysop we have but I see the buttons as essential to this dragon's breath attack. {{User:Vapor/sig}} <sub>20:29, 26 March 2011</sub>
| | {{bid|Stelar|RE}} |
| *'''Questions''' - Do you still want to be a sysop and will you be around? -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 20:30, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| | *'''Vouch''' - Shows up on time and sober, which is more than can be said about most sys-ops. --'''<span style="font-family:monospace; background-color:#222222">[[User:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime"> Spiderzed</span>]][[User talk:Spiderzed|<span style="color:Lime">▋</span>]]</span>''' 16:19, 10 July 2020 (UTC) |
| *: BOO! I feel like I should explain jyself. I'm in my senior year of high school right now, I've been under a bit of stress since mid-November with college admissions and all that jazz. I'm competing for top of my class, and I applied to a few colleges that are a bit beyond my means, so I've had to deal with keeping up performance and virtually whoring myself out to scholarships to make ends meet.
| | *'''Vouch''' - I endorse the product/service. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 17:25, 21 July 2020 (UTC) |
| *:That said, the final admissions decisions come out on the first, and its finally starting to look like my is returning to normal. I'd really like to get back into here, and finish up a few projects I've been meaning to deal with, and handle some of those nice little janitorial tasks that always seemed to get put off in the past. I wouldn't exactly say this is like MacArthur making his triumphant return to the Philippines or anything, but I'd like to stick around and, Lord knows, it seems like half the stuff I was doing before my hiatus needed the buttons.
| |
| *:As for A/VB and A/m, I thought it was pretty well established that I never really have, and probably seldom will even be around those pages. So I'm basically one the janitors and, really, is there any point in getting rid of a willing (if aloof) body in that department? {{:User:Red Hawk One/sig}} 08:09, 28 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *::Awesome. '''Vouch''' -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 16:32, 28 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *<s>'''Abstain''' - RHO has done good work for this wiki, but spurs of inactivity bring to question if there is still interest in being a sysop for this community--{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 20:43, 26 March 2011 (UTC)</s>
| |
| *: '''Vouch''' - back in action is good--{{User:Michaleson/sig}} 17:24, 28 March 2011 (BST) | |
| *'''Against''' - No contribs for a month.--{{User:AnimeSucks/Sig}} 21:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *'''Vouch''' - Let me try to stop this silly tirade of "but he's not active enough!" No one has yet to actually give a good reason why less activity is bad. I don't see how it has anything to do necessarily with him not wanting or not caring or not taking things seriously enough or whatever else. Perhaps he simply is busy with real life? This is should take precedent over the wiki. So, what's the big deal? Explain please. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 21:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *:One more thing, if you're complaining that he isn't active enough as a sysop, how is removing him from being a sysop going to make him a more active sysop? Again, I'm sure he's just busy with real life, and that his activity has little to do with the wiki. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 21:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *::RE isn't about determining "guilt" or somesuch. It is about checking if someone is fulfilling his obligations or not, without regards for the reasons. If someone lacks the time to take care of the wiki due to RL issues, they IMHO should just step down regardless of the reasons, just as someone coaching a junior soccer team or serving a similar honorary office. You might have a sick aunt and a dachshund with cancer, but if that means that you can only show up to one of your youth team's games per month, you plainly aren't viable as a soccer coach anymore. RHO can always follow the Cheese road, increase activity as a regular user and then re-apply. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 21:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *::RE:I agree with this up to a point. If this were simply a question about move/protects/deletes, yeah, there isn't too much harm in keeping someone who knows what they are doing but is a little inactive around as a sysop. Not around? No big deal. Those buttons will still be there when they come back and they can sysop-gnome to their hearts content. But that's not the problem AHLG. The problem is that if he is not around, well, some of the other sysop jobs -- A/VB, A/M -- jobs that require some form of sysop consensus or vote -- become more problematic now. Good luck reaching some form of majority or consensus on those matters if we are going to keep people around who now become more or less "dead" votes. Keeping inactive sysops around is basically saying you are keeping them for maintenance duties and you are punting on the duties that require understanding the current community in some fashion or A/VB, A/M where only the sysops have a real say and the total number of "live" votes begins to matter. The community should at least ask the active/inactive question.-[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 21:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *:::You assume that this wiki is all important and vital. It's not. It's a hobby. Sometimes hobbies are shelved because other things are of issue. There is no obligation. There is no job. There is no duty. This is just fun, it is something to do. RHO has no all important destiny to do anything, the extra tasks he has are simply there because of an inherent problem of giving the ability to block/delete/murder/etc to everyone. It would make certain areas of the wiki difficult for maintaining an information source and a community. I would have it that everyone would be a sysop from the get-go, though like I mentioned, there is an inherent problem that some annoying person would delete the main page and block random joes. There is absolutely nothing special what-so-ever of being a sysop. Nothing, natta, zip. It's just a technical issue. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *::::One other little thing to add, I do see where you are coming from, and I would of course like to see more of RHO if only because I can see another familiar "face." It's just unfortunate that he isn't here more, like most any other user. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *::::I totally get where you are coming from dude. I really do. There was a reason I went with "As AHLG" on Cheese's A/RE when this issue came up. But there are unfortunately some downsides to being inactive that can impact the position. It is potentially a problem. -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 22:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *:::::Yeah, to a point. But why could he not simply abstain if, in the unlikely event that he comes to an A/VB or Misconduct case, can't understand (despite the entirety of wiki events being recorded), should he simply abstain? If instead he were removed, he wouldn't be adding anything anyway. Furthermore, not many cases really require much attention or discussion, and those that do mostly have to do with people have spats at eachother or overblowing things (meaning doing what this wiki so loves to do). It seems more likely that this potential for problem is in a simply enlarged state from a pinpoint issue that is probably no issue at all. --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 22:33, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *'''Against''' - Inactive for a month, not even reacting to boxy's reminder about his own A/RE on his talk page. And that is before I've started to ''really'' look into his contribs, which have similar gaps left, right and center. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 21:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| * '''Vouch'''- i am ok with him keeping his sysop powers --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User_talk:Hagnat|[talk]]] [[wcdz|[wcdz]]]</sup> 22:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *'''vouch'''as hagz. hopefully he will be more active--<small><div style="display: inline-block; height: 14px; width: 18px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: text-bottom;">[[User:Sexualharrison|<span style="position: absolute; display: block; font-size: 0px; height: 14px; width: 18px;"> </span>]][[Image:Boobs.sh.siggie.gif|18px]]</div> [[User talk:Sexualharrison|<span style="color:Red">bitch</span>]] 22:10 26 March 2011 (UTC)</small>
| |
| *'''Against''' - <s>Inactive.{{User:Zombie Lord/sig2}} <tt>23:07 26 March 2011(UTC)</tt></s>
| |
| *:Too active.{{User:Zombie Lord/sig2}} <tt>11:19 29 March 2011(UTC)</tt>
| |
| *'''Abstain''' - This shall turn into a vouch if Red manages to get a least 3 or so contribs in within the time of his Re-evaluation. If not, I shall be looking the other way with an against. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 23:27, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
| |
| *'''Vouch''' - It's rare enough to get one from me but two in two days? The reasons are simple '''1)''' the argument the inactivity group is putting out there sucks, he doesn't even edit A/VB or A/M to rule on cases and being a little busy for a month isn't a big deal, we've all done it his just happens to have been a bad month. '''2)''' He does everything else that a sysop would ever need powers for and all the while avoiding A/VB and A/M, this is a good thing and if more sysops had the common sense to do so when they were promoted solely for the purpose of moving shit and meeting requests the whole team wouldn't be viewed as representative of the few that are too stupid to figure out they weren't promoted to ban actual contributors(Protip: No one ''ever'' is.) --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 04:38, 27 March 2011 (BST) | |
| *:Indeed. His inactivity issue should be dealt on A/DM, not A/RE :P --[[User:Hagnat|People's Commissar Hagnat]] <sup>[[User_talk:Hagnat|[talk]]] [[wcdz|[wcdz]]]</sup> 21:05, 27 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *::Absolutely, that's the whole reason we made that page. Reviews are about guaging community trust in the sysop regularly and hopefully the 'crats will keep that in mind --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev/OmegaMap|maps?!]]</font></sup></small> 01:41, 28 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''Vouch''' - As Gnome and Karek. -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 16:07, 27 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''Abstain''' - As Axe Hack. --[[User:Karloth_vois|Karloth Vois]] <sup>[[¯\(°_o)/¯]]</sup> 17:50, 27 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''Strong Vouch''' - Aside from inactivity, he has nothing else going against him, and inactivity ONLY matters when it might impact a sysop's performance, which is not the case here. Specifically, if a sysop is inactive, they don't have a basis for understanding the context of drama as it comes up, which impairs their judgment as a result. In the case of RHO though, he sticks to gnome duties and avoids the drama parts, so it's an entirely moot point. Inactivity in no way impacts his judgment or ability to perform his duties, since moving, protecting, and deleting pages are tasks that require no context. Having him around only has upsides, whereas having an inactive sysop around who is involved in drama sections is a recipe for potential problems. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:23, 27 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *:'''ding ding ding!''' thad? --<small> <span style="color: DarkMagenta">The preceding signed comment was added by these amazing looking </span><div style="display: inline-block; height: 14px; width: 18px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: text-bottom;">[[User:Sexualharrison|<span style="position: absolute; display: block; font-size: 0px; height: 14px; width: 18px;"> </span>]][[Image:Boobs.sh.siggie.gif|18px]]</div> [[User talk:Sexualharrison|<span style="color:Red">bitch</span>]] 12:03 31 March 2011 (UTC)</small>
| |
| *'''Against''' - inactive. --{{User:Armpit_Odor/dnsig}} 20:46, 27 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''Strong Vouch''' - Red is an incredibly good sysop, and since he only ever votes on VB or Misconduct for tie breaks, his inactivity isn't a big problem. So long as he stays active enough to meet the guidelines, he's an effective Rooster or Swiers. Keep him on.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature}} 21:54, 27 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''vouch''' - RH1 is a king --{{User:Lady Clitoria/Sig}} 08:38, 28 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| * As kark and nome.--[[User:SA|If my name was MisterGame AKA Thadeous Oakley, I would be a massive flaming faggot. >:|]] 23:26, 28 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''Vouch''' - As Aichon. RHO seems to like doing menial work, so let him continue with it. --[[User:Mark Ryerson|Mark Ryerson]] 05:02, 31 March 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''Vouch''' - Despite some inactivity, I trust him enough with the buttons especially considering he mostly uses them for janitorial tasks. Good guy. As Aichon and Karek too. --[[Image:Cat Pic.png|14px]] [[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''Thadeous Oakley''']]</span> [[User_Talk:MisterGame|<span style= "color: black; background-color: white">'''''Talk''''']]</span> 07:01, 2 April 2011 (BST)
| |
| *'''Vouch''' - [[User:G F J|G F J]] 16:27, 2 April 2011 (BST)
| |
|
| |
|
| Ross and I have discussed RHO, and decided to cycle his RE as '''successful'''. Keep up your good work Rooster, we hope to see you around more for the next 8 months, for sure. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 02:25, 3 April 2011 (BST)
| | ===Result=== |
|
| |
|
| ===[[User:Boxy|Boxy]]===
| | Unsurprisingly, the sysops under evaluation have been '''retained.''' Thanks to our two ex-sysops for pitching in to second the rubber-stamping. {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig5}} 14:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| Cycled as successful. Archive of the bid is [[UDWiki:Administration/Re-Evaluations/Boxy|here]]. -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/sig4}} 02:29, 3 April 2011 (BST)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Archived Evaluations==
| | See [[UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/2019-08-06 Re-Evaluations|2019 Re-Evaluations]] |
| *[[:Category:Re-Evaluations Candidacies|Complete list of Re-Evaluations Requests]]
| |
| *[[:Category:Successful Re-Evaluations Candidacies|Successful Re-Evaluations Candidacies]]
| |
| *[[:Category:Unsuccessful Re-Evaluations Candidacies|Unsuccessful Re-Evaluations Candidacies]]
| |
|
| |
|
| | ==Archived Re-Evaluations== |
| | ''For earlier re-evaluations, see the following:'' |
| | *[[:Category:{{CURRENTYEAR}}_Re-Evaluation_Archives|This year's re-evaluations]] |
| | *[[:Category:{{LASTYEAR}}_Re-Evaluation_Archives|Last year's re-evaluations]] |
| | *[[A/SA|Sysop Archives]] for older re-evaluations and related sysop activities |
| {{:UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Check|Re-Evaluations Scheduling}} | | {{:UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Check|Re-Evaluations Scheduling}} |
Once a year, all sitting sysops will come up for re-evaluation by the community. The idea of this re-evaluation is to ensure that each sysop still has the trust of the community, which is vital for a sysop to have. This will give the community a chance to voice their opinions about how the sysops have been doing, and re-affirm or decline their trusted user status.
The idea of a sysop being a trusted user is a part of the guidelines for the general conduct of a sysop. The guidelines for the re-evaluation is the same as for being promoted to a sysop (which is reposted below), but with a few minor changes in wording.
Guidelines for System Operator Re-Evaluations
Once a year, on Urban Dead's birthday (July 3rd), all sysops will be subject to a community discussion. Sysops may also put themselves up for re-evaluation at any time (see below). All users are asked to comment on each candidate in question, ask questions of the candidate, and discuss the candidate's suitability for continuing to be a System Operator. This is not a vote. It is instead merely a request for comments from the wiki community. This will continue for two weeks, as all users get a chance to air their opinions on the candidate.
Once the two weeks are up, the Bureaucrats will review the community discussion and make a decision for each candidate based upon it. The user will be notified of the status of their re-evaluation, and will be retained in their position should it appear that the community is willing to continue to accept them as a System Operator. In the event that the decision is negative, then the sysop will be demoted back to regular user status, where after a month's time, the user can re-submit themself for promotion.
Before users voice their opinions on the candidate who wishes to continue their System Operator status, the following guidelines should be reviewed by the user:
General User Guidelines for System Operator Re-Evaluations
Before voicing their opinion on a candidate's re-evaluation bid, a user should consider some of the following questions:
- Has the candidate spent significant time within the community as a sysop?
- We define this as the candidate having made at least one edit in the past 3 months. It is recommended that a user look over the the sysop activity check and last 500 edits to determine the level of activity of the candidate.
- Note: The Truly Inactive Sysops policy dictates that a sysop who hasn't made an edit within four months is automatically demoted. Therefore, for a sysop to be re-evaluated, they need to have made an edit before that time-frame is up.
- Has the candidate maintained significant activity within the community?
- We define this as at least 50 edits under the candidate's name since their last re-evaluation. It is recommended that a user look over the candidate's last 50 edits in order to get a feel for the activity of a candidate.
- Note: looking in a User's User contributions might give false results for this criterion, as the edit history used to be periodically purged on this wiki.
- Has the candidate expressed interest in maintaining the community?
- We define this as clear evidence that the candidate is already performing maintenance tasks and continuing taking a leadership role on the wiki.
- Has the candidate expressed a desire to continue to be a System Operator?
- We define this simply as indicating in the candidate's request their desire to continue to maintain the position.
- Is there an indication of trust in the candidate.
- We define this as a minimum of three other users (preferably users with at least 200 edits under their name and at least one System Operator), willing to vouch for the candidate's suitability for the role.
If a candidate is highly exemplary in one guideline, a certain level of flexibility should be extended to the other guidelines. Other guidelines for qualifications may be used, these are just a few suggested things to consider before a user voices their opinion.
Re-Evaluations Being Discussed
Recent Re-Evaluations
The 2020 Re-Evaluations have begun. They will go for 2 weeks and end on 09:53, 23 July 2020 (UTC).
Please provide your opinions of the sysops undergoing evaluation below. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 09:56, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- The re-evaluation comment period has now elapsed. Please hold while our beloved Crats decide our fates. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 13:59, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Bob Moncrief
Rosslessness
Stelar
Result
Unsurprisingly, the sysops under evaluation have been retained. Thanks to our two ex-sysops for pitching in to second the rubber-stamping. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 14:48, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
See 2019 Re-Evaluations
Archived Re-Evaluations
For earlier re-evaluations, see the following:
Total Sysops: 4 (excluding Kevan, LeakyBocks and Urbandead)
Last updated at: 03:58, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
