[WikiEN-l] RFA idea...

[Al Tally]

2008/7/26 Jon <scream at datascreamer.com>

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Colleagues,
>
>
> As some of you already know, I've undergone an RFA recently.  Thats ok.
>  No matter the result, I try to vote on some RFA's whenever I ask for
> the community do discuss me.
>
> On the same token, I try to vote on some AFDs (or close some) whenever I
> submit an AFD.
>
> As I read some of the RFAs ongoing, I discovered a trend.  So I looked
> into the recent historical RFA votes. (Lets not get to wrapped around
> vote=!vote, for simplicity of this proposal/idea, I'll call all
> comments, discussions... votes)
>
> I have discovered what appears to be a trend in clique mentality and
> power centralization.  Also, I have discovered some crazy oppositions,
> for example "I view self noms a prima facia evidence of power hunger."
> This is among the craziest I've seen.  Not that the editor is crazy, but
> the oppose is.
>
>
> Here is my suggested solution:
>
> Allow editors (those who have not already undergone RFA, desysopped
> under a cloud, and desysopped by Arbitration) to sysop after 2500 edits
> and 6 months on the project without any recent behavior related blocks.
>  Permit the crats or admins to grant and take away adminship.  If this
> idea has some support on the mailing list (with any suggested
> alterations) I think I might put up a policy page as I have done on
> IPBLOCKEXEMPT for discussion.
>
> The advantages of such a system would eliminate power centralization,
> clique mentality, and some of these outrageous opposes.
>
> Everyone here is an academic.  We are building en encyclopedia.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> - --
> Best,
> Jon
>
> [User:NonvocalScream]
>

Why are you posting this off-wiki? The place for this discussion (which is a
perennial one, by the way) is the RFA talk page.

-- 
Al Tally
(User:Majorly)