Opt-out global sysop proposal

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Opt-out global sysop proposal

NuclearWarfare
Many of the list regulars might remember the global sysop proposal that had
been brought up around May and June 2009. The idea ultimately fizzled,
because there was simply not enough support to actually have a global,
non-opt out sysop group. Since then, a new proposal has been drawn up, which
is currently running, that allows communities to opt-in to a global sysop
wikiset, which would allow users in the global sysop usergroup to act as
sysops only on those wikis. However, the issue with this is that no project
has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the better
part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing
amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers
can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately
becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards.

The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop group;
there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be
excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in "small
wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop wikiset.
Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but would
use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the
third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page.

2008 Proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal)
Current process (opt-in), inactive:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops
Opt-out proposal:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal

----
User:NuclearWarfare on all WMF wikis
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Opt-out global sysop proposal

Andrew Leung-5

I doubt it will generate enough interest this time around. Many of us are just tired of seeing this proposal (and its variants) dragging on and on, to the point that we just don't bother to show up and say no.

Andrew

"Fill the world with children who care and things start looking up."




> From: [hidden email]
> Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:55:25 -0400
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [Foundation-l] Opt-out global sysop proposal
>
> Many of the list regulars might remember the global sysop proposal that had
> been brought up around May and June 2009. The idea ultimately fizzled,
> because there was simply not enough support to actually have a global,
> non-opt out sysop group. Since then, a new proposal has been drawn up, which
> is currently running, that allows communities to opt-in to a global sysop
> wikiset, which would allow users in the global sysop usergroup to act as
> sysops only on those wikis. However, the issue with this is that no project
> has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the better
> part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing
> amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers
> can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately
> becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards.
>
> The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop group;
> there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be
> excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in "small
> wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop wikiset.
> Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but would
> use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the
> third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page.
>
> 2008 Proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal)
> Current process (opt-in), inactive:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops
> Opt-out proposal:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal
>
> ----
> User:NuclearWarfare on all WMF wikis
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

_________________________________________________________________
New! Faster Messenger access on the new MSN homepage
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677406
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Opt-out global sysop proposal

Steven Walling
"Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of
vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers can help
some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the
job of just a few of the active stewards."
If global sysops is such a controversial idea, why don't we abandon it in
favor of either:

A) More stewards, possibly even with a special election on an emergency
basis.

B) Get a sysop recruitment drive going on those wikis which need sysops.
Either drum up support from within these smaller communities or try and
attract interest from older wikis that have plenty of sysops. Of course, the
big barrier here might be language.

Steven Walling

On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Andrew Leung <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
> I doubt it will generate enough interest this time around. Many of us are
> just tired of seeing this proposal (and its variants) dragging on and on, to
> the point that we just don't bother to show up and say no.
>
> Andrew
>
> "Fill the world with children who care and things start looking up."
>
>
>
>
> > From: [hidden email]
> > Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:55:25 -0400
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: [Foundation-l] Opt-out global sysop proposal
> >
> > Many of the list regulars might remember the global sysop proposal that
> had
> > been brought up around May and June 2009. The idea ultimately fizzled,
> > because there was simply not enough support to actually have a global,
> > non-opt out sysop group. Since then, a new proposal has been drawn up,
> which
> > is currently running, that allows communities to opt-in to a global sysop
> > wikiset, which would allow users in the global sysop usergroup to act as
> > sysops only on those wikis. However, the issue with this is that no
> project
> > has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the
> better
> > part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing
> > amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global
> rollbackers
> > can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately
> > becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards.
> >
> > The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop
> group;
> > there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be
> > excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in
> "small
> > wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop
> wikiset.
> > Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but
> would
> > use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the
> > third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page.
> >
> > 2008 Proposal:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal)
> > Current process (opt-in), inactive:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops
> > Opt-out proposal:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal
> >
> > ----
> > User:NuclearWarfare on all WMF wikis
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> New! Faster Messenger access on the new MSN homepage
> http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677406
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Opt-out global sysop proposal

Geoffrey Plourde
I think that swearing in a battalion of global sysops is both necessary and a better idea than electing more stewards. Vandalism looks bad and deters people from contributing. Lets face it, who wants to visit a library with all the books defaced in various shades of Crayons. Also, does anyone want to use reference books with the pages chopped out and replaced with adcruft? I strongly suspect the answer is no. It is necessary to provide a janitorial pool to maintain our mothball fleet, or otherwise it will become a liability and ecohazard like the US one in Suisun Bay.

Despite the need for globally authorized sysops, electing more stewards is not the answer. We already had an election, and all those interested got an up or down vote. Also, our practice of electing once a year is orderly and minimizes stress.
Elections for global sysops would definitely lead to a lot of drama.It would be better to have the stewards appoint people with clue to oversee set areas.



________________________________
From: Steven Walling <[hidden email]>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 9:58:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Opt-out global sysop proposal

"Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing amount of
vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global rollbackers can help
some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately becomes the
job of just a few of the active stewards."
If global sysops is such a controversial idea, why don't we abandon it in
favor of either:

A) More stewards, possibly even with a special election on an emergency
basis.

B) Get a sysop recruitment drive going on those wikis which need sysops.
Either drum up support from within these smaller communities or try and
attract interest from older wikis that have plenty of sysops. Of course, the
big barrier here might be language.

Steven Walling

On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Andrew Leung <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
> I doubt it will generate enough interest this time around. Many of us are
> just tired of seeing this proposal (and its variants) dragging on and on, to
> the point that we just don't bother to show up and say no.
>
> Andrew
>
> "Fill the world with children who care and things start looking up."
>
>
>
>
> > From: [hidden email]
> > Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:55:25 -0400
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: [Foundation-l] Opt-out global sysop proposal
> >
> > Many of the list regulars might remember the global sysop proposal that
> had
> > been brought up around May and June 2009. The idea ultimately fizzled,
> > because there was simply not enough support to actually have a global,
> > non-opt out sysop group. Since then, a new proposal has been drawn up,
> which
> > is currently running, that allows communities to opt-in to a global sysop
> > wikiset, which would allow users in the global sysop usergroup to act as
> > sysops only on those wikis. However, the issue with this is that no
> project
> > has actually bothered to opt-in, so the process has been dead for the
> better
> > part of a year. Meanwhile, the stewards have had to combat an increasing
> > amount of vandalism on the small wikis, and even though global
> rollbackers
> > can help some, blocking vandals and deleting nonsense pages ultimately
> > becomes the job of just a few of the active stewards.
> >
> > The situation could be easily remedied if there were a global sysop
> group;
> > there are a good number of trustworthy global rollbackers who would be
> > excellent global sysops. I drew up a proposal to automatically opt-in
> "small
> > wikis" (as defined within the below proposal) into a global sysop
> wikiset.
> > Global sysops would have full administrator tools on those wikis, but
> would
> > use them only in response to blatant vandalism. Please take a look at the
> > third link and give your opinions about the proposal on the talk page.
> >
> > 2008 Proposal:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops_(2008_proposal)
> > Current process (opt-in), inactive:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops
> > Opt-out proposal:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal
> >
> > ----
> > User:NuclearWarfare on all WMF wikis
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> New! Faster Messenger access on the new MSN homepage
> http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9677406
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l



     
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l