[Foundation-l] Stewards policy proposal

[GerardM]

Hoi,

A steward is someone who is trusted to do right. Are you of the
opinion that by curtailing what a steward can or cannot do you improve
this trust. The only thing that you do is that someone who is trusted
in his local environment and is trusted in a broader scope should give
up his position?? For what ??

No, this is something that may you think is the right thing to do. To
me it is not necessary. Worse, I think it is an awful idea.

As to the checkuser tool. When a suspicion exists that some sock
puppetry is happening and a trusted person, someone who knows how to
use the tool, uses this tool discreetly, I am all for it. I am all for
it because it is not necessary to fan the flames. When asked all that
needs saying if anything at all is that there is some sock puppetry
going on.

Please understand the operational word... trust....

Thanks,
    GerardM

On 1/27/06, Mihai Floran <mihai at emma.ro> wrote:
> As the stewards community got larger and not so many things to do right now I think we should have a larger policy about stewards, their status and functions.
>
> First of all I think that if we want to have neutral stewards they should not be members of staff in local projects (sysop, bureaucrat) because this can influence their decision.
> The current stewards should have a period to think about the issue and consider if they want to leave their local status or the steward status.
>
> Another urgent issue is checkuser policy regarding stewards. We don't have one and I think is immediatly subject.
>
> Any other ideas?
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>