Forum:Rollback rights?

Forums: Index > Ministry of Love > Rollback rights? (talk)

Note: This topic has been unedited for 3762 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Smile, Walmart loves you. In fact, it's rubbing up against you at this very moment.

This might be the stupid question of the week, but, is it possible for me to get "rollback rights"? We all have access to the JavaScript version, but for me, it still has some bugs to it. When rolling back a particularly long page, my browser has to load the history page, then load the version it's going to rollback to, load the edit box, and then finally save the page. And then in certain cases rollback doesn't work at all, and it tries to rollback a funny-looking, nonexistent page.

So I was wondering if rollback rights existed on this wiki, and if so, if it's possible to get them. Doctor Skullthumper

• Yes, it's possible. and For --Charitwo^Talk 21:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
• Skullthumper, stop being a whore and get +sysop already. Oh, and strong sysop-ish for, of course. -- Jack Phoenix, professional killer admin (Whine?) • (Wikia ♥ ads) 21:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
• I may not be an admin, but I give you a 4. (And if you think 'Dancing with the Stars' when I say this, you need to get your head out of the media gutter) - Admiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate 21:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
• Fine with me. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:09, Apr 13
• Doooo it. I know I'm no op so I don't have much say in this, but whatever. sirsysrq @ 01:13 Apr 13
• Doesn't asking for a privilege often result in the opposite happening? If not, then I have bad luck... --AAA! (AAAA)
• delete and demote to delort.   Le Cejak • <Apr 13, 2008 [17:41]>
• Three blueberries and a plain muffin -- The Zombiebaron 20:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
• For but against rickrollback rights. -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 04:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Sure - Speaking of which, does Charitwo have rollback rights? Or is that the stupidest question ever? Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 06:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Yeah, Charitwo's the only person currently with "true" rollback (that's how he gets reverts quicker than just about every other non-admin). Oh, and for Skull. –—Hv (talk) 14/04 14:49
• for   Le Cejak • <Apr 14, 2008 [16:44]> 16:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• For (Bonner) (Talk) Apr 14, 16:46
• Fore. VGD >=3 19:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Sure, and use this more in the future. But only to make other lesser users jealous. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 21:39, 14 Apr 2008
• Why not? Spockezri

But seriously

• Okay, hold on a moment. What makes Skullthumper different from everyone else? Oh, I don't mean his lisp, or his terrible work ethic. Generally speaking, he's a user like many others, but he is unique. No offense to Skully (he is a doctor after all), but I don't think there is any real need for rollback rights, for anyone. We've long had javascripts for adding [rollback] links to diffs. We've got a javascript that even adds a [rollback] to recent changes. I'm sure we could make a script to add [rollback] links to user's contrib pages too, unless we already have such a script. Basically, rollback rights are just a way of saying "Hey, we like this guy. He does stuff. He's like an admin, but without all the facy sadism." And that begs the question, "Why not, when we have the next VFS, just vote for Skullthumper?", eh? -- The Zombiebaron 20:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Agreed. Dr S., you're one of the best non ops on this site imo. Just wait till the next VFS and you'll get opped. srsly--Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 20:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• I DO NOT WANT OPS. Period. And as I've already explained, the JS doesn't work all the time for me. It's slow at times, but more importantly, if there's a mass vandalism thingy going on I can't get it to work properly on the user contribs page, if I'm anywhere other than the first page. And besides, who's to say that I'm the only one that deserves rollback rights? I'm sure others can get it. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 20:27 Apr 14, 2008

  And, if "others can get it", what's to stop everyone from wanting it? Its like having 1/5 of the power of an admin, but without the other 4/5. -- The Zombiebaron 20:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

  It's not really an adminly power, it's just like, the JS without the bugs. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 20:42 Apr 14, 2008

  It's starting to sound like lesser Sysop powers minus the responsibility. Although I agree with Thedudeman, you'd make a great op. But if you don't want it I understand. I would never be able to handle that. sirsysrq @ 20:44 Apr 14

  How is it a sysop power if there's a slow, JS version of it? I just wanted to know if I could get the real version, which does the same stuff minus the bugs & the slowness. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 20:47 Apr 14, 2008

  Yeah, but there's a title involved. And, based on what happened with that Grue thing, we all know how much people love getting fancy titley things on the internet. "With great power comes great responsability", and people will want (possibly even get) the power who do not have the responsability (people other than you, Skully, of course). -- The Zombiebaron 20:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

  Ew, yuck. I didn't think rollback rights were really all that big of a deal. I didn't even realize it could be considered a title. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 20:53 Apr 14, 2008

  And as usual, here comes Luv who's utterly confused about the whole thing. What does the [rollback] do? -- Luverly - (Contribs) (Talk) Grammar Nazi, Mum , BFF & NotM, CUN , GMP . - Perkele! 20:57, 14 Apr

  Reverts quicker than undo, with the stock [Reverted edit(s) of...] edit summary, basically. –—Hv (talk) 14/04 20:59

  I thought it was a sex position, like reverse cowgirl, but with Starfleet uniforms? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

  The power itself isn't a big deal. But people (other than me) may get upset about DrS getting "special powers," which is really what I meant by my other comment. I have no problem with DrS getting rollback rights, but I'm just saying that others may find this to be special treatment. (Not to say he hasn't earned that.) sirsysrq @ 21:04 Apr 14

  When I found out that we had rollback rights here and they weren't being used, I was kinda surprised. I thought it would've been granted to more people. Maybe it could even be made into a regular thing — you get UOTM, you get rollback rights? (shrugs) – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 21:11 Apr 14, 2008

  That's a good idea. They do that on illogicopedia. We could use that here, because unlike illogicopedia, we actually have vandalism. --THE 21:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

  I'm still confuddled, but nevermind me... -- Luverly - (Contribs) (Talk) Grammar Nazi, Mum , BFF & NotM, CUN , GMP . - Perkele! 21:18, 14 Apr

  That sounds like a good idea, although I hesitate to apply it retroactivley. That could cause some nasty retcon paradoxes, like that thing with Gwen Stacy. -- The Zombiebaron 21:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

  I like the idea of voting for Rollback Rights. But don't mix that up with UotM. Make it a separate vote, don't distort the meaning of UotM. Perhaps a vote for a VFR (Vote For Rollback) is in order? sirsysrq @ 21:35 Apr 14

• I hate to be an idiot on this thing, but... what are rollback rights? TOO LATE! IDIOT DETECTED! I voted before I understood.   Le Cejak • <Apr 14, 2008 [22:22]>

Make VFR a monthly reality?

Score: 0

• I think so. This would be better than mixing Rollback Rights in with UotM. This may be getting a little ahead of myself, so I guess I should see if other people like the idea. sirsysrq @ 21:35 Apr 14
• No. It shouldn't be made like some kind of award. And definitely shouldn't be made a monthly thing. We need less of those. Just make it so you just need 3 sysops and a bureaucrat to OK you, or something. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 21:43, 14 Apr 2008

  Sounds much more appropriate. Perhaps it would mimic the current opping system, where the ops vote as to whether or not one is needed? sirsysrq @ 21:44 Apr 14

  Um... No. rollback isn't that nessicary when we have the userrollback js. if people want it, just let them ask, but its not nessicary either way.--Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 21:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

  I was thinking more, "go on IRC, ask 3 sysops to OK, and then find a bureaucrat who agrees" type thing. Another voting page would make baby jesus cry. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 21:57, 14 Apr 2008

• I agree with everything Spang said. Getting rollback doesn't need to be an award, because people can already get it via their .js if they want it. Just ask a couple ops to OK it if the javascript doesn't work for you. Also, Necessarily. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 22:41, Apr 14
• Against. And way to go completely against the point of this entire forum, which was to make rollback not some kind of mystical award thing. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 22:49 Apr 14, 2008

  Excuse me for the simple suggestion. On second thought, I like Spang's idea of just rounding up 3 sysops. But I guess my point is that this needs to be somewhat official-like so as to prevent an uproar as to why some non-admin users have what others do not. sirsysrq @ 23:41 Apr 14

  I don't think that even that would be an issue. If someone that doesn't have rollback wants it, they just get the .js. If the .js doesn't work for them, they just ask, like Dr. S is doing. Dunno why anyone would start any kind of drama over that. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 23:53, Apr 14

  Allow me the opportunity to halt the bun fight of drama, and instigate the food fight of food. /me tosses bowl of cereal Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

  Yes officer, that's him! That's the man that threw cereal all over my precious widdle snuggums Mr. Poodle! - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:59, Apr 15

• Strong Against. Make it "ROLL'D WEEK", and then we'll talk (about bans). -- The Zombiebaron 23:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Against. It's too close to Rickrollback. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
•  For Rickrollback.--<<>> 01:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Rollback tool, more trouble than help

So now we are about to have another user category, with another selection process. More bureaucracy. What for? So a few people don't have to bother to install a script which does just the same this tool does. Not wise, nope.---Asteroid B612 (aka Rataube) - Ñ 17:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh good God, people, it's not another user category. It's just a tool, that's all it is. It's not a title, it doesn't require a monthly election, it's not a special priviledge. It's just a tool, a tool that has a hacky version available to all users. The real deal just happens to be faster, and that's all I care about. Dr. Skullthumper 209.158.177.14 17:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Correction: Faster, and it works on more pages. There's still a few bugs as I described before. But that's all it is, a tool! Dr. Skullthumper 209.158.177.14 17:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Trying....so hard....mustn't.... make "tool" joke.... - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 21:41, Apr 15

I'm actually not sure what you mean by "faster", Skully, and why being fast seems to matter so much. Leaving aside all the technical mumbo-jumbo (doesn't .js just always load when your browser loads a page? if that part is slow, get a new browser/internet connection...) why does it matter? Seriously. If someone reverts something faster than someone else, that doesn't really matter. Hell, its not even a real edit conflict. More of a "Oh, hey, that guy is quick and stuff". Its good work, and its hard work, and someone gotta do it. If you take a few extra seconds, what's the damage? If it takes you 5 minutes, what's the damage? As long as it gets done, it gets done. :) -- The Zombiebaron 00:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Meh, I just figured it'd be easier than having to use the "undo" button whenever the rollback .js fuckz0rz up. I didn't know this was gonna be such a big deal. Voting and discussion and shit. Was there this much drama when Charitwo got it? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 00:28 Apr 16, 2008

Even more. It´s not a good idea to start this all over every next time someone asks for revert rights. When someone comes asking "hey how do I become an admin", we answer you just don´t. I think it should work the same for people asking for rollback rights.---Asteroid B612 (aka Rataube) - Ñ 16:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Isn't a rollback tool...sorta pointless here? ItCouldBeATumah 16:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand why. We have a JS with the same general functionality, but a few bugs. Adminship grants all sorts of powers, and responsibility. Rollback just gives users the real deal versus the thing that craps out on you once in a while. I don't see why it would just be me and another user, either. I don't see why it shouldn't be given to the majority of regulars on the site. There's no real need for the JS, and like I said, the bugs are annoying. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 17:29 Apr 16, 2008

I'm not sure what bugs you are talking about, as I use Safari, where javascripts never work the way they're supposed to. I never had the rollback script. I did just fine. If you're having problems, get some java person to fix it. Personally, I find that catching one of those people who's userpages I just linked on IRC works best, as you can pester them into fixing stuff, however, dropping a message on your favorite one's talkpage will work just fine. On a side note, we need more active scriptpeople. -- The Zombiebaron 21:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

In summary

Drama, I bite my thumb at you. If rollback rights are gonna be this difficult, they're not worth it. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 21:44 Apr 16, 2008

Yikes! He said the D-word! And here I thought we were having fun... -- The Zombiebaron 21:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

And it was going so well until that guy with the red-and-black sig decided to make a new section and stir everything up... – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 21:48 Apr 16, 2008

Don't forget his red, white and blue tie and rainbow suspenders. Zb has terrible taste. This is off the record, right? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Red and black just were never meant to be together. I say we get him on that one makeover show. The one with that perky girl and the obviously gay guy. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you mean that girl with the breasts?--<<>> 23:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I've given Dr. Skullthumper rollback rights, and here's why: I agree with Rataube that creating a new "level" of user is a bad idea, but I think people are artificially creating a new level by making a big deal out of the whole thing. Spang's idea is a good one... it lets people who actually care get rollback rights without publicizing it. In conclusion, FU Spang. —rc (t) 05:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

And they all lived happily ever after... after what though?.. dun dun DUN!!! --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 09:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

i can haz twist ending? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 02:28 Apr 18, 2008

M. Night Shamylan ending: You get opped against your will. You discover the terrible secret of the Cabal: that they feed on leprechauns. Meanwhile, I learn how to spell that last name. sirsysrq @ 02:32 Apr 18

The cabal doesn't eat leprechauns. They contain barely any nutrition, and taste like burnt chicken. What the cabal eats is souls. Mmmm. Delicious. I mean, that's what we would eat, if we existed. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:35, Apr 18

Hey! I've never opped anyone against their will. Ever. Seriously. Don't look at me like that. T_T --PantsMacKenzie 16:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

YOU'LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIIIIIIIVE!!!!!! ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 23:46 Apr 24

Well, somebody certainly wants attention. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:56, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Who? Whoooo? ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 01:42 Apr 25