or we just agree that it will only be used for IP's (and if I'd have to say it, only for short terms, so that overriding would not be a big issue too. ) If we agree on that, I think we should be able to trust the stewards to adhere to that, and there would be no need to also make sure it is not technically possible.
BR, Eia
2008/1/31, Alex mrzmanwiki@gmail.com:
The ability for local sysops to override it would help this a bit, but ideally, it should be restricted to blocking IPs only until SUL is implemented.
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
Yeah, it's not perfect, but it seems like it would be a good tool for stewards to have. Only thing is, I'm envisioning a scenario where a valid user with good contribs gets blocked, doesn't user meta, tries to get unblocked at his home project, but cannot because he's not locally blocked, and the user doesn't know how to get in touch with a steward (Because he doesn't know of this policy) or doesn't understand how to communicate with one. I don't think it's necessarily that big of a deal, but I think it will need a LOT of localization to be effective.
-Dan On Jan 31, 2008, at 7:14 AM, David Gerard wrote:
On 31/01/2008, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:
For the global admin list, I was under understanding that stewards are actually doing the job.
Yes, stewards have a lot of the higher administrative powers for small wikis that don't have much of a community yet. Including checkuser, so the stewards using checkuser are on checkuser-l and haven't yet screamed in horror at the notion ;-)
- d.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- Alex (en:User:Mr.Z-man)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l