User:Jackattack1597/New Inactive Desysopping Criteria 2021

I am seeking help drafting the final statement for this RFC, and also finalizing the proposals. I would like it to be relatively simple, so I don't want to make more than 2 or 3 proposals in the actual RFC. Here are the four similar draft proposals I have.

Draft Statement: We currently have only one criterion for desysopping admins ( No edits for 12 months)  but two criterion for returning the tools on demand( An edit within 2 years, and a logged admin action within 5 years), and as a result we have many admins who have not made any recent administrative actions who make edits once in a blue moon to retain the tools. This is both a security risk ( As more inactive admin accounts increases the chances of a compromised admin), and a competence concern, as admins who have not made a single administrative action in five years will likely not be very familiar with policies and guidelines, causing a risk of disruption if they suddenly reemerge from hibernation to resume regular administrative activity. When such a significant period of time has passed, an administrator should be desysopped even if they meet the editing requirement, and notifications should be eliminated in order to decrease the number of admins who game the requirements. 

Proposal 1: Replace WP:INACTIVITY with the following: Administrators who have made no edits for at least 12 months may be desysopped. Additionally, administrators who have not made a publicly logged action that is only available to administrators for 5 years may be desysopped. There would be no prior notifications for administrators subject to these criteria aside from a watchlist notice, an announcement on Administrator's noticeboard, an announcement on Bureaucrat's noticeboard, and a mass message sent to all current administrators notifying them of the change. This desysopping is reversible in some cases (see #Restoration of adminship) and never considered a reflection on the user's use of, or rights to, the admin tools. Desysopping on inactivity grounds should be handled by English Wikipedia bureaucrats. The summary in the user rights log should make it clear that the desysopping is purely procedural.

Proposal 2: Replace WP:INACTIVITY with the following: Administrators who have made no edits for at least 12 months may be desysopped. Additionally, administrators who have not made an action that is only available to administrators for 5 years may be desysopped. This includes logged actions that only administrators can perform, editing fully protected pages, and closing discussions and requests that only administrators may close. There would be no prior notifications for administrators subject to these criteria aside from a watchlist notice, an announcement on Administrator's noticeboard, an announcement on Bureaucrat's noticeboard, and a mass message sent to all current administrators notifying them of the change. This desysopping is reversible in some cases (see #Restoration of adminship) and never considered a reflection on the user's use of, or rights to, the admin tools. Desysopping on inactivity grounds should be handled by English Wikipedia bureaucrats. The summary in the user rights log should make it clear that the desysopping is purely procedural.

Proposal 3: Replace WP:INACTIVITY with the following: Administrators who have made no edits for at least 12 months may be desysopped. Additionally, administrators who have not made a publicly logged action only available to administrators for 5 years may be desysopped. This desysopping is reversible in some cases (see #Restoration of adminship) and never considered a reflection on the user's use of, or rights to, the admin tools. The admin must be contacted on their user talk page and via email (if possible) one month before the request for desysopping and again several days before the desysopping goes into effect. Desysopping on inactivity grounds should be handled by English Wikipedia bureaucrats. The summary in the user rights log should make it clear that the desysopping is purely procedural.

Proposal 4: Replace WP:INACTIVITY with the following: Administrators who have made no edits for at least 12 months may be desysopped. Additionally, administrators who have not made an action that is only available to administrators for 5 years may be desysopped. This includes logged actions that only administrators can perform, editing fully protected pages, and closing discussions and requests that only administrators may close.This desysopping is reversible in some cases (see #Restoration of adminship) and never considered a reflection on the user's use of, or rights to, the admin tools. The admin must be contacted on their user talk page and via email (if possible) one month before the request for desysopping and again several days before the desysopping goes into effect. Desysopping on inactivity grounds should be handled by English Wikipedia bureaucrats. The summary in the user rights log should make it clear that the desysopping is purely procedural.

Proposal 5:Replace WP:INACTIVITY with the following: Administrators who have made no edits for at least 12 months may be desysopped. Additionally, administrators who have not made a logged action that is only available to administrators for 5 years may be desysopped. This desysopping is reversible in some cases (see #Restoration of adminship) and never considered a reflection on the user's use of, or rights to, the admin tools. The admin must be contacted on their user talk page and via email (if possible) one month before the request for desysopping and again several days before the desysopping goes into effect. If an admin is notified in this matter due to failing the logged action criteria, they must be informed that if they have performed a non-logged administrative action within 5 years, they can show evidence of it, and the Bureaucrats can record the date of the non-logged action presented as long as they determine it to be a valid administrative action. Desysopping on inactivity grounds should be handled by English Wikipedia bureaucrats. The summary in the user rights log should make it clear that the desysopping is purely procedural.

I'm open to feedback and suggestions on both the draft statement phrasing and on the proposals. I really want to find a better phrasing than competence concern, because I know that phrasing would draw white-hot fire from many users, so I'm open to suggestions on alternate phrasing there.

I'm leaning towards starting an RFC with versions of proposals 3, 4, and 5 ( All three keep notifications, but vary on the definition of admin action), but I'm open to suggestions.