[WikiEN-l] declining numbers of EN wiki admins - The theory that making it easier to get rid of admins is a solution to the decline in their active numbers

[Charles Matthews]

David Lindsey wrote:
> What we need, then, is not a way to desysop more easily, but rather a way to
> delineate highly-charged and controversial administrator actions, and the
> administrators qualified to perform them, from uncontroversial administrator
> actions, and the administrators qualified to perform them.  I will not
> presume to provide a full criteria for what separates controversial from
> uncontroversial administrator actions, but I would suggest something along
> the lines of the following.  Controversial: Arbitration enforcement actions,
> blocks of established users for any reason other than suspicion of account
> compromise, close of AfDs where the consensus is not clear (this of course
> becomes itself a murky distinction, but could be well enough set apart),
> reversal of the actions of another administrator except when those actions
> are plainly abusive.  Non-controversial: All others.
>
>   
In other words, a two-tier system of admins. Against that, I really 
think there is an area that should be thought through, just alluded to 
there. The criteria for reversing another admin's actions do matter, and 
it seems to me matter most.

Admin actions that can be reversed (i.e. technical use of buttons, 
rather than interaction by dialogue) lack the sort of basic 
classification we need: into situations of urgency and situations that 
can wait; situations of key importance to the project (such as involve 
harassment, for example), and those that can be treated as  routine; and 
into situations where consultation should be mandatory and those where a 
second admin can use judgement to override. The fact that some people 
might conflate those analyses illustrates the need to be more careful here.

I think this is something to untangle. We need to get to the bottom of 
the community's fears about "overpowerful" admins, by talking through 
and delineating what a single admin can expect to face in awkward 
situations. I've never been in favour of restricting admin discretion, 
which is really what is being proposed. We can't anticipate the 
challenges the site will face (even though it may appear that there is 
little innovation from vandals and trolls). I do think admins can be 
held to account for their use of discretion. Right now it seems that a 
piece of the puzzle is missing: admins don't know clearly how they stand 
in relation to the actions of other admins.

Charles