autopatrol
187
edits
WiKirby talk:Editor-in-Chief/draft: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Pinkyoshifan (talk | contribs) (→Review) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
#As needed. There is no need for replacement when/if the current team already does a good job. [[User:Trig Jegman|Trig]] - 15:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC) | #As needed. There is no need for replacement when/if the current team already does a good job. [[User:Trig Jegman|Trig]] - 15:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
#I say as needed per the reasons above. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 04:54, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | #I say as needed per the reasons above. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 04:54, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Consensus seems to be to make it "as needed". [[User:Tacopill|Tacopill]] ([[User talk:Tacopill|talk]]) 16:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | |||
==Position Requirements== | ==Position Requirements== | ||
| Line 22: | Line 23: | ||
#Admins+ have the most experience since they have been around the wiki for the longest, so I say Admins+. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 04:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | #Admins+ have the most experience since they have been around the wiki for the longest, so I say Admins+. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 04:56, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
#'''Moderator+''' but without extra rules suggested by Trig. They have experience and trust, so if the community prefers one of them they could go for one too. —[[User:Viperision|Viperision]] ([[User talk:Viperision|talk]]) 06:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | #'''Moderator+''' but without extra rules suggested by Trig. They have experience and trust, so if the community prefers one of them they could go for one too. —[[User:Viperision|Viperision]] ([[User talk:Viperision|talk]]) 06:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Consensus seems to be to make it "Admin+". [[User:Tacopill|Tacopill]] ([[User talk:Tacopill|talk]]) 16:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | |||
== Review == | == Review == | ||
| Line 34: | Line 37: | ||
Overall I'm mostly fine with everything else (sans annual elections but they are already discussed above). {{User:Superbound/sig}} 14:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC) | Overall I'm mostly fine with everything else (sans annual elections but they are already discussed above). {{User:Superbound/sig}} 14:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
:I was going to leave "does the AEiC become bureaucrat", "does the AEiC need to be a bureaucrat to be chosen", etc., up to an EiC; but if we want formalize it, we can. | |||
:Similarly, we can make it an electable position, rather than appointed. | |||
:[[User:Tacopill|Tacopill]] ([[User talk:Tacopill|talk]]) 16:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | |||
== AEIC == | |||
I think AEiC would create even more Rank separation, and we should simplify it down. Being the only other active bureaucrat, Samwell is basically already that. In case of extended (complete) inactivity without a notice or a clear declaration of stepping down, the wiki owner should hold a new EiC election. No AEiC needed - it's basically EiC deciding who should automatically become one without new elections. WiKirby won't go on fire in these short infrequent EiC-less time frames. —[[User:Viperision|Viperision]] ([[User talk:Viperision|talk]]) 06:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | I think AEiC would create even more Rank separation, and we should simplify it down. Being the only other active bureaucrat, Samwell is basically already that. In case of extended (complete) inactivity without a notice or a clear declaration of stepping down, the wiki owner should hold a new EiC election. No AEiC needed - it's basically EiC deciding who should automatically become one without new elections. WiKirby won't go on fire in these short infrequent EiC-less time frames. —[[User:Viperision|Viperision]] ([[User talk:Viperision|talk]]) 06:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
:I agree with Viper. Having an AEiC would create unneeded rank complexity since Samwell - and possibly other active Bureaucrats in the future - already serves as a sort of AEiC. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 07:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | :I agree with Viper. Having an AEiC would create unneeded rank complexity since Samwell - and possibly other active Bureaucrats in the future - already serves as a sort of AEiC. -- {{User:MetaDragon/sig}} 07:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
::Per Viperision, the AEiC position seems a bit | ::Per Viperision, the AEiC position seems a bit unneeded. {{User:Pinkyoshifan/sig}} 12:09, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | ||
:::The point of the position is to prevent the situation that happened in FEW, where they disappeared and the rest of the wiki went without any burecreates, which meant no new admins or patrollers could be appointed, etc. Had they have a second-in-command to fill in the gap, they could have stepped in and do the promotions as needed. True, the current EiC is good at the moment. I' m just proposing this position as a worst-case-scenario plan. (Same with the idea that the staff can vote to remove an EiC, if they ever disappear.) [[User:Tacopill|Tacopill]] ([[User talk:Tacopill|talk]]) 16:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC) | |||