UDWiki:Administration/Re-Evaluations: Difference between revisions
Krazy Monkey (talk | contribs) (→Boxy) |
Krazy Monkey (talk | contribs) (→Aichon) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
#(If you end up reading this in time): Do you have a best estimate on when, or if, UD might reach an active population of zero? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:33, 5 July 2017 (UTC) | #(If you end up reading this in time): Do you have a best estimate on when, or if, UD might reach an active population of zero? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 00:33, 5 July 2017 (UTC) | ||
#:If left to itself, popularity tends to have rather [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_tail long tail]. As such, reaching true 0 would take quite some time. In the case of UD, were it left to itself, I wouldn't be shocked if I was told 30 years from now that people were still playing. That said, I doubt Kevan would leave it to itself, simply on account of the fact that running the game costs a non-zero amount of money, whereas his revenue from the game is likely to hit 0 in the not-too-distant future. I'd wager the costs are relatively negligible, especially as the game shrinks, and Kevan strikes me as the sort who would try to keep it running as long as possible, perhaps even being willing to lose a bit of money on it each month, but I'd guess we're already past the halfway point of the game's life. I'd give it another 10 years or so. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC) | #:If left to itself, popularity tends to have rather [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_tail long tail]. As such, reaching true 0 would take quite some time. In the case of UD, were it left to itself, I wouldn't be shocked if I was told 30 years from now that people were still playing. That said, I doubt Kevan would leave it to itself, simply on account of the fact that running the game costs a non-zero amount of money, whereas his revenue from the game is likely to hit 0 in the not-too-distant future. I'd wager the costs are relatively negligible, especially as the game shrinks, and Kevan strikes me as the sort who would try to keep it running as long as possible, perhaps even being willing to lose a bit of money on it each month, but I'd guess we're already past the halfway point of the game's life. I'd give it another 10 years or so. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 15:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC) | ||
#If you could only eat one particular type of cake for the rest of your life, what would it be? -- {{User:Krazy_Monkey/sig}} 18:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC) | |||
===Boxy=== | ===Boxy=== | ||
Revision as of 18:57, 5 July 2017
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
Comments will close on July 18th, 2017. Current bureaucrats Bob and Ross are not up for re-evaluation.
A Helpful Little Gnome
- A Helpful Little Gnome (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | logs1 | logs2 | vndl data | sysop archive)
Aichon
- Aichon (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | logs1 | logs2 | vndl data | sysop archive)
As mentioned in my userspace announcement, I'll be away for a few weeks starting the day after tomorrow. If you have any questions for me, you had better ask them today, otherwise I won't have time to notice and respond before I head out. —Aichon— 15:46, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
- (If you end up reading this in time): Do you have a best estimate on when, or if, UD might reach an active population of zero? -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:33, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- If left to itself, popularity tends to have rather long tail. As such, reaching true 0 would take quite some time. In the case of UD, were it left to itself, I wouldn't be shocked if I was told 30 years from now that people were still playing. That said, I doubt Kevan would leave it to itself, simply on account of the fact that running the game costs a non-zero amount of money, whereas his revenue from the game is likely to hit 0 in the not-too-distant future. I'd wager the costs are relatively negligible, especially as the game shrinks, and Kevan strikes me as the sort who would try to keep it running as long as possible, perhaps even being willing to lose a bit of money on it each month, but I'd guess we're already past the halfway point of the game's life. I'd give it another 10 years or so. —Aichon— 15:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- If you could only eat one particular type of cake for the rest of your life, what would it be? -- Cheese 18:57, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Boxy
- Boxy (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | logs1 | logs2 | vndl data | sysop archive)
- Vouch or whatever - I'm fairly certain Boxy not being a Sysop is a sign of the apocalypse. --Cheese 18:53, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Spiderzed
- Spiderzed (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | logs1 | logs2 | vndl data | sysop archive)
Stelar
- Stelar (talk | contribs | UDWiki contribs | logs1 | logs2 | vndl data | sysop archive)
- Not much to say here other than you may end up being the only Sysop if Bob happens to drop off the planet again! -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 00:33, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Recent Re-Evaluations
Archived Re-Evaluations
For earlier re-evaluations, see the following:
- This year's re-evaluations
- Last year's re-evaluations
- Sysop Archives for older re-evaluations and related sysop activities
Re-Evaluations Scheduling
| User | Position | Last Contribution | Seat Available |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Helpful Little Gnome (Contribs) | Bureaucrat | 2021-10-29 | 2021-12-01 |
| DanceDanceRevolution (Contribs) | Bureaucrat | 2021-10-28 | 2021-12-01 |
| Rosslessness (Contribs) | Sysop | 2024-06-10 | N/A |
| Stelar (Contribs) | Sysop | 2021-10-29 | N/A |
Total Sysops: 4 (excluding Kevan, LeakyBocks and Urbandead)
Last updated at: 03:58, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
