Forum:Introduce oversightership role?

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Introduce oversightership role?

Note: This topic has been unedited for 1279 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Currently only sysadmins have oversight, but I think its needed to be able to run for it. It should be held at the next VFS in April. Because of the trust required, it should require 15 support votes and 75% support. Here is why we need oversight.

I was recently noticing a lot of PII needing deletion. Contacting a sysadmin is hard, so I request most of them to Cassie. However, I'd like to hide it even further then that-to the point where only a few extremely trusted users can see it. [1] [2] [3] were all revdeled but should be further suppressed, and likely another diff I won't post publically. This is a problem that I think having oversight for is needed.Gale5050 complain about me! And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Voting

Score: -4

Against

1.  Against. I do not see this being necessary. We do not have the same amount or type of problems that Wikipedia has. The current system is working fine. MrX blow me 22:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
2.  Against. As per MrX. Seems completely unnecessary. PF4Eva, the President of Imagination Vote for me My tax returns 01:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
3. Against In my 11 years on Uncyclopedia I have seen exactly 1 thing that would require oversight and that was a child porn upload. Point being, it's so extremely rare that genuine oversight is required its not worth bothering with creating seperate role, revdel is good enough for most things barring 0.001% of the most extreme rule violations (CP, dox, malware, etc). ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 03:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
4. Against for now - Keeping it to bureaucrats OR sysadmins is fine. If it happens that somehow, illegal uploads (e.g. non-consensual pornography) sneak their way in, a sysadmin could take it down via oversight. However, for most purposes, normal revdel is fine. If it happens that illegal uploads start becoming something recurring (e.g. more often than every week), then I am willing to introduce the oversight role, but for now, it's unnecessary (plus it means pestering Lyrithya, and we all know that won't work).  Cassandra  (talk) 02:15pm  January 20, 2021
5. Against. The list of current admins and crats is almost double the actual number of active regular users. We don't need any more roles. ShabiDOO 22:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

Comments go here. Gale5050 complain about me! And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

And please try to explain your supports/opposes. Gale5050 complain about me! And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:11, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

With regards to MrX-yes, that is true. However, its better to have one, just in case of emergency. You never know when. We probably only need 2, and the only reason we'd need a 2nd is to make sure the first isn't abusing OS. I will also say on WP, they don't oversight edits often. I'd say based on what Primefac said, I am responsible for 80% of supression requests. [4] [5], the entire page was oversightdeleted, [6], [7], [8]. Gale5050 complain about me! And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

You don't need to post any more Wikipedia links here. They are irrelevant. The admins already have the tools they need to handle any emergencies that might arise. MrX blow me 22:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

They do, I just want it to be further hidden. There are some RDs, like in the history of I eat my own shit, that don't require OS and must be treated seperately. However, I do see your point. Gale5050 complain about me! And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:33, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

The formatting is atrocious. We usually don't have separate subsections for support and oppose. You've made it so that we had to edit twice, once to vote and again to correct the score. Also, I don't get why oversight is even an issue. PF4Eva, the President of Imagination Vote for me My tax returns 04:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh whoops, I thought you’d just edit the vote section. Gale5050 complain about me! And see my Wikipedia contributions! 12:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

No problem. :) It just deviates from the norm. PF4Eva, the President of Imagination Vote for me My tax returns 12:48, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

New proposal

I am proposing something new-to add the oversight usergroup to the bureaucrat one. Please let me know what you think, as people are clearly against have a seperate role.

Voting

Score: 0

Neutral. Bureaucrats can give themselves the oversight function via userrights permission; this means that any attempt to use oversight will still be possible (albeit, will be documented via the user rights log). Therefore, it's redundant, and as such, I'm not voting against nor for since nothing will change.  Cassandra  (talk) 02:00am  January 21, 2021

Discussion/Comments

1. Comment. I weakly disagree with Cassie-it may make a suppression more visible in a way. But, yeah, Cassie does make a good point. Gale5050 complain about me! And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)