[Foundation-l] Opt-out global sysop proposal

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

[Foundation-l] Projekt:...

[Foundation-l] Proposal:...

NuclearWarfare

31 Aug 2009 31 Aug '09

1:55 a.m.

Many of the list regulars might remember the global sysop proposal that had been brought up around May and June 2009. The idea ultimately fizzled, because there was simply not enough support to actually have a global, non-opt out sysop group. Since then, a new proposal has been drawn up, which is currently running, that allows communities to opt-in to a global sysop wikiset, which would allow users in the global sysop usergroup to act as sysops only on those wikis. However, the issue with this is that no project has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the better part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards. The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop group; there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in "small wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop wikiset. Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but would use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page. 2008 Proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal) Current process (opt-in), inactive: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops Opt-out proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal ---- User:NuclearWarfare on all WMF wikis

Show replies by date

Andrew Leung

31 Aug 31 Aug

3:08 a.m.

I doubt it will generate enough interest this time around. Many of us are just tired of seeing this proposal (and its variants) dragging on and on, to the point that we just don't bother to show up and say no. Andrew "Fill the world with children who care and things start looking up."

...

From: nw.wikipedia(a)gmail.com Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:55:25 -0400 To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Foundation-l] Opt-out global sysop proposal Many of the list regulars might remember the global sysop proposal that had been brought up around May and June 2009. The idea ultimately fizzled, because there was simply not enough support to actually have a global, non-opt out sysop group. Since then, a new proposal has been drawn up, which is currently running, that allows communities to opt-in to a global sysop wikiset, which would allow users in the global sysop usergroup to act as sysops only on those wikis. However, the issue with this is that no project has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the better part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards. The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop group; there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in "small wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop wikiset. Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but would use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page. 2008 Proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal) Current process (opt-in), inactive: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops Opt-out proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal ---- User:NuclearWarfare on all WMF wikis _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_________________________________________________________________ New! Faster Messenger access on the new MSN homepage http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677406

Steven Walling

4:58 a.m.

"Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards." If global sysops is such a controversial idea, why don't we abandon it in favor of either: A) More stewards, possibly even with a special election on an emergency basis. B) Get a sysop recruitment drive going on those wikis which need sysops. Either drum up support from within these smaller communities or try and attract interest from older wikis that have plenty of sysops. Of course, the big barrier here might be language. Steven Walling On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Andrew Leung <andrewcleung(a)hotmail.com>wrote;wrote:

...

had

been brought up around May and June 2009. The idea ultimately fizzled, because there was simply not enough support to actually have a global, non-opt out sysop group. Since then, a new proposal has been drawn up,

which

is currently running, that allows communities to opt-in to a global sysop wikiset, which would allow users in the global sysop usergroup to act as sysops only on those wikis. However, the issue with this is that no

project

has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the

better

part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global

rollbackers

can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards. The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop

group;

there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in

"small

wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop

wikiset.

Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but

would

use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page. 2008 Proposal:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal)

Current process (opt-in), inactive: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops Opt-out proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal ---- User:NuclearWarfare on all WMF wikis _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_________________________________________________________________ New! Faster Messenger access on the new MSN homepage http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677406 _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Geoffrey Plourde

5:57 a.m.

I think that swearing in a battalion of global sysops is both necessary and a better idea than electing more stewards. Vandalism looks bad and deters people from contributing. Lets face it, who wants to visit a library with all the books defaced in various shades of Crayons. Also, does anyone want to use reference books with the pages chopped out and replaced with adcruft? I strongly suspect the answer is no. It is necessary to provide a janitorial pool to maintain our mothball fleet, or otherwise it will become a liability and ecohazard like the US one in Suisun Bay. Despite the need for globally authorized sysops, electing more stewards is not the answer. We already had an election, and all those interested got an up or down vote. Also, our practice of electing once a year is orderly and minimizes stress. Elections for global sysops would definitely lead to a lot of drama.It would be better to have the stewards appoint people with clue to oversee set areas. ________________________________ From: Steven Walling <steven.walling(a)gmail.com> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 9:58:47 PM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Opt-out global sysop proposal "Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards." If global sysops is such a controversial idea, why don't we abandon it in favor of either: A) More stewards, possibly even with a special election on an emergency basis. B) Get a sysop recruitment drive going on those wikis which need sysops. Either drum up support from within these smaller communities or try and attract interest from older wikis that have plenty of sysops. Of course, the big barrier here might be language. Steven Walling On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Andrew Leung <andrewcleung(a)hotmail.com>wrote;wrote:

...

had

which

project

has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the

better

part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global

rollbackers

can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards. The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop

group;

there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in

"small

wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop

wikiset.

Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but

would

use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page. 2008 Proposal:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal)

_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

5379

days inactive

5379

days old

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

3 comments

4 participants

tags (0)

participants (4)

Andrew Leung
Geoffrey Plourde
NuclearWarfare
Steven Walling