Fallout Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Fallout Wiki
Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Vote: Policy regarding inactive users with additional rights

Foreword

What follows is a decisive vote of the community, regarding the recent policy changes concerning the user rights of inactive administrators, moderators, etc. Some discussion on the matter can be found here.

To summarise, users have brought up concerns about the inactive additional rights users, and have proposed that their rights be removed. However, there is disagreement as to when they should be removed and how the rights are to be returned.

This vote will be comprised of three parts:

1. The first poll will be a vote on when to remove an inactive user's additional rights.

2. The second poll will be a vote on how the removed rights of inactive user's are to be regained or restored.

3. There will also be a third vote that will keep all things on this matter in statu quo.

Also, please note that under any proposal, the inactive users in question will be informed regarding this matter, with ample time to respond before any actions is taken regarding their user rights.

Notes on voting

* Vote #1: Vote by inserting your signature under the section of the proposal you support. A voter may only vote for one.

* Vote #2: Vote by inserting your signature under the section of the proposal you support. A voter may only vote for one.

* Vote #3: If a user has already voted on either of the first two polls, he/she may not vote on this one. By adding your signature in the section for vote #3, you support no changes and all relevant aspects of this matter will remain in statu quo.

Vote #1

Vote #1 Proposal #1

Definition of inactive is 6 months of a lack of editing. Definition of inactive for rights removal is 9 months of a lack of editing.

Votes

  • Agent c (talk) 21:40, October 5, 2012 (UTC) a rolling period is required as I think this for fairness needs to be an ongoing policy, not a one off action.
  • Stars and Stripes Forever (talk) 22:21, October 5, 2012 (UTC) Optimal time period. 12 months and over is too long. If users are serious about their rights they should have to prove themselves to be valuable in a recent timespan.
  • --C'n-Frankie -ArroyoTalk 02:49, October 7, 2012 (UTC) I believe this is the perfect span of time bearable in order for the community not to consider the user inactive. More than six months of no-editing should be consider negligence or abandonment (at this point, explanations should be given). Even though everyone has their real-life predicaments here and there for some weeks or a couple of months, being away for more than six months is quite grave, and nine months pretty much means that he/she is incapable of sticking to the wiki's needs any longer.
  • --3 of Clubs "This is my road, you'll walk it as I say" 09:27, October 7, 2012 (UTC) I think this option supplies the best possibility. I think that once the user has been titled inactive in this case, that they should be informed that if they do not return in the next period of time, their rights will be removed. This gives them a chance to see that if they really care for the site and want to stay, that they need to make the effort to come back in the next time period. And if they don't, then I believe everyone can agree to the removal of their rights.
  • This seems like an adequate time enough to determine who is inactive or not. --Enclavesymbol 14:35, October 7, 2012 (UTC)
  • Paladin117>>iff bored; 17:50, October 7, 2012 (UTC) I agree, 9 months is a pretty long time to be inactive for, I'm not sure how I feel about vote #2, though.
  • --Bunny2Bubble 17:59, October 8, 2012 (UTC) This is a perfectly fair period of time for inactivity.

Vote #1 Proposal #2

Definition of inactive is being a lack of editing for 12 months. This is also the definition of inactivity for rights removal.

Votes

Vote #1 Proposal #3

Definition of inactive is being a lack of editing before January 2011. In other words, being active after January 2011 does not qualify.

Votes

Vote #2

Vote #2 Proposal #1

Inactive admins/moderators will have their user rights removed by the bureaucrats and restored by a community vote upon a return to constructive editing.

Votes

  • Agent c (talk) 21:43, October 5, 2012 (UTC) this ensures all admins can claim the support of the current community, not their forebears. However, I think this should be an exception to the convention on b/cs not commenting on requests. As old hands, ghost, J and Clyde are some of the best people to speak on the record of those who's rights have lapsed.
  • If they're inactive admins/moderators... they should be inactive admins/moderators. --Enclavesymbol 14:34, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Vote #2 Proposal #2

Inactive admins/moderators will have their user rights removed by the bureaucrats and restored via request to a bureaucrat upon return to constructive editing.

Votes

  • --C'n-Frankie -ArroyoTalk 02:57, October 7, 2012 (UTC) Since the given user has already proven his valour as trustworthy once, I think a simple evidence presentation to the b'crat that his/her comeback has been solid and constructive is enough. No need to go through community voting again - unless his previous inactivity had left conflicts among other members, in which case the b'crat(s) should mediate a conciliation between the parts involved.
  • --3 of Clubs "This is my road, you'll walk it as I say" 09:29, October 7, 2012 (UTC) I completely agree with what Frankie said above. Isn't much else I think can be said there actually. He covered all the points I can agree with.
  • --Bunny2Bubble 18:03, October 8, 2012 (UTC) I think is more than fair. I fully trust the bureaucrats to determine whether or not the former admin is in shape to be a current one.

Vote #2 Proposal #3

Inactive admins/moderators will have their user rights removed by the bureaucrats. Should they return, they must meet current formal requirements and formally apply for any position they desire again.

Votes

  • Stars and Stripes Forever (talk) 22:21, October 5, 2012 (UTC) This helps ensure an equal playing field for all users. The user in question will most likely get the benefit of the doubt during a vote anyway because of their experience.

Vote #2 Proposal #4

Inactive admins/moderators will have their user rights removed by the bureaucrats and restored per their request.

Votes

Vote #3

By voting under this, you hereby support no changes made in this respect and all will remain in statu quo.

Votes

Comments

Question: does the definition of "editing" in this situation only include article edits, or is it edits in general? USA Flag Pre-War User Avatar talk 22:21, October 5, 2012 (UTC)

Good question, it's basically "editing" in general, as a quantitative form of measuring activity. --Skire (talk) 22:48, October 5, 2012 (UTC)
Basically what Sig said, I would further define it as: If you're an admin, becoming active in article editing and community relations, if a mod or a chat mod, active community participation and chat. --Bunny2Bubble 18:05, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

Result

Advertisement