[Wikipedia-l] Special:Desysop

[Tim Starling]

Andrew Garrett wrote:

> I've today developed an extension based on Special:Makesysop that may be a
> solution to the problems (at least on en: ) with the process of gaining
> adminship. Part of the problem with adminship is that it is somewhat
> difficult to remove. This extension may change that. The extension, as
> currently configured, allows local bureaucrats to desysop a user. I believe
> that this is sensible. If we can trust bureaucrats to set the sysop bit, why
> shouldn't we trust them to remove it? Additionally, desysopping is quite a
> political issue, and generally requires the intervention of somebody
> *familiar with the situation*, not an outsider who has simply been informed.
> Therefore, I suggest that we use this extension to allow Bureaucrats to
> desysop users in serious cases of abuse of powers. A different process for
> desysopping may need to be developed to accompany this - and a policy on
> when bureaucrats may use this ability.

There's no inherent reason why a steward should be an outsider, that's 
just a matter of policy. It's no accident that bureaucrats can't desysop 
people -- the reason, simply put, is that it was meant to be harder to 
desysop than to sysop. It wasn't meant to be impossible, however. I did 
make the assumption that stewards would competently oversee the 
Wikimedia projects, not be frozen by fear of the community.

Most of the actions we let people do on wikis are reversible, such as 
editing or deleting articles. There are two things however that are 
potentially irreversible -- desysopping and blocking. Both of them can 
easily lead to the permanent loss of contributors from the project, and 
so should be done only with great care. Sysops are especially vulnerable 
to an attack on their pride, and since they are generally 
wikipediholics, they are devastated by being blocked.

I'll support a move towards allowing bureaucrats to desysop people on a 
project-by-project basis, but I'd like to make sure it's well informed 
by knowledge of the likely social consequences.

-- Tim Starling