Forum:VFS replacement

Forums: Index > Village Dump > VFS replacement

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6405 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I strongly believe that the VFS system is highly flawed, and judging from the comments on that page, I'm certainly not the only one. Therefore, after discussion on IRC (a while back, actually), I propose a return to the old system, with some changes.

• Voting for new sysops should only take place when there is demonstrable need and agreement among several admins. At the very least there should be Cabal consensus.
• When there is such a need, a Forum topic should be started on the subject. This is what it was like before VFS.
• However, and this is one of the big points, we should state from the beginning exactly how many admins we need and are going to op. Personally I doubt we should ever need to op more than two users at one go, unless something catastrophic happens, like a meteor strikes the next Uncyclopedia BBQ and half our sysops are killed. Which I don't anticipate happening.
• Voting commences. I still think votes should be admin-only, since they are generally the ones who know what's going on at Uncyc. There are of course dedicated users who you could say the same of, but allowing some regular users and not others is walking a thin line, I think.
• After some time or after the vote totals hit a certain point, a bureau can op the top nominees.
• Afterwards the other vote counts are thrown out. Next time we need more ops we go through the same process. One round of voting has no weight in the next round.

--Rc (Talk) 04:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

A question from the floor. Would users be able to leave comments on the VFS system? Hinoa 05:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

In the new system? Absolutely I think they should be able to, and I know a lot of users whose opinions would carry serious weight even if they couldn't properly vote. --Rc (Talk) 14:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

For that proposal, also for desysopping RC. --Sir Splak KUN UotM NotM MDA HoF VFP Bur. SG CM +S NS © (talk) 05:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

For --Rc (Talk) 06:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to see votes on anything made admin-only; this whole running joke about a supersecret cabal out to oppress the great unwashed masses has likely gone far enough already. If only admins can nominate new admins, what is the mechanism for users dissatisfied with the way things are run (for whatever reason) to nominate people who might handle things differently? It seems a little too closed in that respect. --Carlb 09:49, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but the problem as I see it is that we'd either have to have admin-only voting or completely open voting, otherwise we'd be making exceptions, and you know what Kant says about exceptions. Also - and I should have said this earlier - but I think that like in the current VFS system, anyone should be able to nominate someone for sysop, but the vote should be in the hands of property-owning white males current admins. The reason for this simply that it's generally safe to assume that the admins know what is happening around Uncyc, not because we're some superior breed. --Rc (Talk) 14:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Not necessarily admin-only or completely open. For instance, on Froggiepedia, they let any account vote that, as of one week prior to the nomination in question, existed and had 50 significant edits to its name. You might have some simple threshold like that without being too closed. --Obvious Meatpuppet 15:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC) Also, Kant is wrong. Exceptions rule!

Deprecate VFS as RC suggests. Admin votes only, with comments welcome from the floor. With all the recent problems with socks and alleged vote tampering, I think that sysoping is best done by other sysops.--Winston 15:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh so we aren't allowed to tamper with votes now? What's next!? Building a fence around all of uncyc to prohibit foreigners from entering illegally!? Hm?!?! IS THAT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN!?!?!   t o m p k i n s  blah. F@H CUN VFH CM NS MORE FOULS, LESS BOWELS 17:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't sound too bad, really. Hinoa 17:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

FOR - The fence would also stop admins from ever leaving. Problem solved from both directions. Geeeenius. --Dan Huffman 18:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

For But I still think non-admins should vote, but only if they have there (optional) ID cards after all they prevent terrorism benefit fraud terrorism ID Theft terrorism illegal immigation terrorism health tourism terrorism it's a manifesto commitment terrorism BECAUSE--Maj Sir Elvis KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and Bar UGM F@H (Petition) 20:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC) not at all bitter about his errosion of civil liberties

An Idea From a Zombie Ok here's an idea to solve the voting problem, we make a page (where anyone can vote/comment/nominate) called Vote For Sysop Voting. It would come into effect on a semiregular basis, and on it the genral unwashed masses could all vote for people, so that those people could vote on sysops. No I'm not joking. Current sysops would, of course, be automaticly be promoted to the level of sysop voter, while anyone else would have to win the right. This takes care of the problem of "people wanting change", and also doesn'y really exclude anyone. --Zombiebaron

Ugh, I'm all for voting on stuff, but this seems like an unnecessary extra layer. A system like Dan Huffman suggested might work though. --Rc (Talk) 06:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Then we need to figure out what a "significant edit" really is. —Hinoa KUN (talk) 06:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

$significantedit=good.$

$notsignificantedit=URGAY.$ --Maj. Lady Katie (talk) (complain) 07:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Don't mess with uruguay! I think users with more than 1000 edits prior to the nomination should be able to vote.--Rataube 11:57, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

But editcountitis should be discouraged... we don't want it to grow here. --KATIE!! 12:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Bettar Idea We could just go with the old *ahem* Canadian Military saying "Kill 'em All, and Let God Sort 'em Out." --The Captain Zombiebaron MUN, ⌘, UGotM, CM, POW (shout) 02:05, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Canadian military. Albigensian crusade. So similar. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 05:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)