Forum:A Formal Public Vote To Deop Roza

Forums: Index > Village Dump > A Formal Public Vote To Deop Roza

Note: This topic has been unedited for 2107 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Vote Closed: Roza has removed her own admin rights voluntarily

Hello everyone. As some of you are aware, last night I removed Roza's administrator and bureaucrat userrights. This was not a decision I took lightly, and I only did it after months of private discussions with the active site administrators. We chose this course of action to limit the amount of public drama caused by this decision, but my changes were reverted by the Server Staff and I've been told I must bring this matter to a public vote.

1. There was never a public vote to op Roza: As you can see in this IRC log from 2017 the decision to op Roza was made by RAHB and I without community input. We chose to give Roza administrator rights so that she would stop pestering the admins on IRC.
2. Roza has consistently abused her power: In early 2018 our site logo and Main Page were replaced by Roza without a vote. These are clear cases of Roza abusing her right to edit those elements due to her elevated userrights. As part of her role as an administrator Roza was given access to our community's twitter account, which she has misused. She was given an administrator role on the community discord server, which lead to her constantly imposing her organization on the rest of us, even well after she was told to stop.
3. Roza sabotages community initiatives: Last month a new fork of our project, Uncyclopedia 2.0, was created on the Miraheze wikifarm. It was decided on Discord that because this fork constituted a massive violation of our copyrights and might one day compete with us for Google ranking we should contact Miraheze staff and try to get it taken down. Roza sabotaged this effort to the point that Miraheze staff approached me to tell me they were suspicious of her actions. Around the same time a few admins were privately working to contact our long lost brethren on the Uncyclofandom wiki, however Roza's insistence on discussing sensitive details of this plan in public has made it hard to proceed.

Nobody I have talked to about this wants a massive drama forum. We are constantly trying to grow our userbase, and the sort of public disagreement that a forum of this nature breeds is a terrible first impression of our community to give someone. I would like to publicly apologize to everyone for my actions last night, hopefully you can see why I felt it was the best way to resolve this long standing issue, and if anyone has further questions I would be happy to answer them. -- The Zombiebaron 21:34, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

The Formal Vote To Deop Roza

Score: 3

1. Nom and For. -- The Zombiebaron 21:34, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
2.  Against. Hey Zombie, I would like to address your three points.
   1. There was a forum vote to give me bureaucrat rights under my old username. And as you can see in the user rights log for Kakun, a fellow admin, giving op rights through IRC has been a well-established practice on Uncyclopedia for some time now.
   2. The two on-site issues which ZB has brought up have all been resolved. I sought approval on IRC to change the site logo to a newer version, and when ZB felt that was inadequate, he started a forum page to settle the manner with a tense but ultimately constructive vote. It concluded with the community settling on keeping the logo change, with an option of designing a more community involved logo in the future. The main page issue, yes that was awful and contentious and led to dozens of sprawling Discord shouting matches, but even that was settled with a vote to revert the changes to the front page, and start a main page redesign contest with more community input. I apologize for these two cases, but I feel that admins have been forgiven for much worse.
   3. Yes, the Miraheze issue. Not sure how an external site manner is relevant, but I'll explain things regardless. My intention with contacting the member of Miraheze staff was to prevent a messy, complicated legal fight between the site and Miraheze, since ZB was openly considering sending DMCA takedown notices and threatening to sue Miraheze for copyright infringement. I also wanted an end to a certain user's "epic trolling" of their Discord server, since this certain user was impersonating the owner of the 2.0 wiki, engaging in abusive behavior on their server, to get the admins there to remove the 2.0 site due to TOS abuse.
   4. And concerning issues of behavior on our Discord server, although I am deeply offended at Supergeeky1's gross mischaracterization of my behavior (all the while ignoring the constant abuse he and his friends have lobbed at me), I do understand people's concerns. Yes, I can be a drama hog, and yes I do get into constant arguments with certain users on the server. I have stepped down as op there, and have promised to disengage from all arguments there, including a promise not to speak to SG1 or ZB except in exigent circumstances. I am thankful to ZB for making this forum public, and not repeating his flagrant power abuse of yesterday, in which he removed all my user rights without a public vote. – roza^☭ 22:05, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

   I find it bizarre that you believe my actions last night were "flagrant power abuse". We clearly agree there is a precedent for granting userrights without a broad community vote, why then should it be different for removing userrights? The Uncyclopedia community has never had to deal with removing bureaucrat rights before, so there was no historical path to follow. I freely admit it would have been optimal to have held a broad vote before taking action, but I'm sure you'll agree that sometimes to make a lasting change its best to have the vote after the changes have been made. -- The Zombiebaron 22:33, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

   If it were not flagrant power abuse which "crossed the line", it would not have been reverted. Making changes to site pages without receiving community approval is a serious transgression, I will admit, but the flagrant abuse of your bureaucratic powers to ignore on-site policy and secretly remove a fellow bureaucrat's user rights is a serious step above that. Even a single instance of that on Wikipedia (a website you feel we should mimic more) would result in an immediate, perpetual ban. No one wants that at all, you've been a beloved figure on the site for many years, and I'm willing to forgive this momentary lapse in judgement. On a lighter note, it seems almost all the concerns you've brought up are external site matters. Perhaps a vote to set my Discord account to read-only for a set period of time would be preferable to this? Thanks again for responding. – roza^☭ 22:55, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

   I believe that Lyrithya abused her powers when she reverted my userrights changes, although that is really a matter for another time, a private time. For now I will say that Lyrithya is not a bureaucrat, and the only way she was able to revert my changes were as part of her role running our servers, an unelected position. I have not engaged in a revert war as a show of good faith, hence why we are here on this forum. I'm not sure what Wikipedia policy has to do with this, nor my opinion of parodying their Main Page. -- The Zombiebaron 23:09, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

3.  For - I won't deny that Roza has been a thorough contributor to the site. In fact, I'll even state on record that I think she gives more of a shit than I do. The problem is, her power status has been a consistent source of drama. For the last few days, and longer than that, really, the community has torn itself apart arguing over this one user. It's felt like Game of Thrones level drama. (I assume. I haven't really watched that show.) It's ridiculous and I'm getting really tired of this crap. And yet, just as Jesus said to forgive your transgressors seven times seventy times, I'm willing to continue my infinite patience, forgiveness and empathy towards Roza. I think she can continue to be a member of our community, but she's going to have to work her way back up, earn respect, admin and crat rights again, if that's even possible at this point. There's no shame in losing admin and crat rights. It's simply a demotion from a privileged position in our community. That's a far cry from, say, being infinibanned several times and put on parole, like I was. Which might have in some way helped me mature and end up being the respected user I am today. You can stick around, but chill. The fuck. Out. -- Thankful Kippy Share blessings Bountiful harvest 01:33, Feb. 13, 2019

   It seems your issue comes from drama on the Discord server. In my opinion, it would be ridiculous to remove someone's rights merely because some users on Discord are uncomfortable with it. I would be willing to accept a read-only role on Discord, or even a ban from the server, but I'm not sure how relevant the issues brought up are in terms of the site. Admins don't come back from having their rights removed, that's just how it goes, so I'd hate to leave because we can't settle our differences in a civil manner. Thanks for the response, Kip. – roza^☭ 01:48, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

   A lot of the drama has gone beyond simple Discord arguments and is tied to your actions on the wiki itself, Twitter, etc. Others will probably rehash it in the votes to come, but the source of most of the drama is fundamentally linked to your position of power. Like we've discussed, I'm willing to hear your case for not stripping your admin and crat rights, and for any kind of compromise, but there doesn't seem to be any options that move beyond this fact. -- Thankful Kippy Share blessings Bountiful harvest 10:22, Feb. 13, 2019

4.  For. What Kippy said. — SG1|Hereish ^{[citation needed]} 02:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
5.  For. Although I don't like the view of this vote because it was held by someone who seems to have been fighting against Roza for months (and looks somewhat like a political factional conflict between Pro-ZB users and Pro-Roza users to me), I have to admit Roza is going too far. It's partly because Roza has sent me dozens of PMs on Discord to campaign me to vote against, but not limited to it. She even told me to go import main contents of uncyclopedia.co when she was de-opped yesterday (which is against our will and our agreement), has updated the main page without votes (though I personally like the new design, that's that; we should follow the rules after all), and so on. --The Pioneer 03:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

   Oh, I assumed that was a personal deal between us as two admins, I guess not. Anyway, I've removed my rights now, so this won't be relevant. – roza^☭ 03:50, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Comment

• Comment. The thing is, we need clarified rules rather than customs to avoid this kind of conflict. If the use of IRC/Discord to make decisions has been a custom, however, I think it's time for us to make it clear that the public forum on wiki is the place for making formal and official decisions, because not all members on wiki use them. I think holding a vote for de-cratting is a good idea, but if there are no rules for de-cratting our members, we should make them first so that no one can claim that this vote, as well as the action of ZB yesterday, is invalid. I'd rather make a proposal to make such rules first, and then have a vote or whatever.--The Pioneer 02:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
  • Members on Discord told me voting was everything... So OK, I don't think anyone would claim this vote is invalid after all.--The Pioneer 02:31, 13 February 2019 (UTC)