[WikiEN-l] Parker Peters's comments

[Mark Wagner]

On 10/6/06, Parker Peters <onmywayoutster at gmail.com> wrote:
> Mgm,
>
> I could agree with that. I think that maybe there ought to be multiple
> grades of admin, who have specific abilities. Part of the problem right now
> is that so many admins wield what might as well be "absolute power" when
> compared to a normal user.
>
> For instance, why not have a "first grade" admin who have the power only to
> semiprotect articles (to protect from systemic anon-ip/newuser vandalism),
> not to lock talk pages at all (including user talk pages) and to impose
> blocks up to 48 hours but no longer? Make them ask for help if they see
> anything that needs anything longer or appears to be a problem?

Gradations are the wrong way to go about it.  You may be giving people
the tools they don't need, while at the same time denying them the
tools they do.  For example, I do a lot of work dealing with problem
uploads.  That means I need the ability to delete, undelete, and view
deleted pages, and the ability to edit protected pages.  On the other
hand, I've got little use for protecting, unprotecting, and
semi-protecting pages, or for blocking and unblocking users.  Your
"first grade" admin tools would be useless to me.

On the other hand, a newpages patroller needs the ability to block
users, delete pages, and protect pages from creation, but is unlikely
to need to undelete pages, unblock users, protect or unprotect
existing pages, or edit protected pages.  A recent-changes patroller
needs the abilities of a newpages patroller, but also the ability to
protect or semi-protect pages.  A toolset tailored to my needs would
be nearly useless to either of them.

The correct way to get rid of the appearance of "absolute power" is to
have users specify the tools they want as part of their RfA
application, and re-apply if they find they need a different set of
tools.

-- 
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]