Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-4832646-20140607004850

Yep. I'm proposing to get rid of these. Usually, I wouldn't have to, but since Fatal has decided that it would be better to keep him we have opted for a community decision.

Why would I want to get rid of something where a user could express their opinion? Because no one uses them, no creates applications, no one has anything to do with them. They need to be gone. They are doing nothing but taking up space and the community only gets the say of "support" or "oppose". Very rarely are applications considered soley by community action. It's slightly involved, but we generally judge by job merit.

All admins have the ability to grant rights. Fatal, Skelly and I grant admin and bureaucrat on top of the other three, which admins can grant. (rollback, RCaDC, and Chat Moderator) It wouldn't necessarily be a barrage on all of our talk pages, and the size of the community is too small to have these.

What do I propose in return? All staff can decide upon the three universal rights. This can be disputed by another admin, if they have a reason behind why said person shouldn't have the right. It can also be disputed by the individual via reporting wrongdoings or power abuse, and can be disputed by the community itself via thread. Bureaucrats have the additional ability to decide upon administrators and other crats, but heavy discussion can also be put into it.

But where's your say in who gets the rights? Well, during the time between selecting a user for a right and actually granting the right (varying from instant for rollback, 5 days for Chat Mod, 10 days for RCaDC, and 15 for admin, with 20 for bureaucrat.) a thread will come up on an occasional basis. (We wouldn't be promoting willy nilly. Whereas we will promote on an as needed basis, at best we would demote inactive users and select new ones every 3 months.) You can input your opinion and facts behind the behavior of the user, and we will investigate.

Prereqs will also be dictated for the users selected for rights, not dependant on edits and other things, but dependant upon: Their ability to help the wiki, their skills in editing, whether it is fixing broken redirects or correcting grammar, their time on the wiki, their previous experience and their general attitude towards the user base. Basically, the community gets a fair opinion but rights can be chosen on an as needed basis or a set time of every three months, the latter being the usual case.

This is a much fairer system to both the user base itself and the staff of the wiki. It would also gain a slight bit more notice and since it will be instituted by staff, more use.

 