User talk:Ral315/WTHN

I like your policy. It's not too often that you see an RfA policy as lax as this one. It bothers me when people are so uptight about every little detail of an RfA, totally ignoring the fact that overall they will prove more good than harm. And then add in the fact that we need more admins now to take care of all the backlogs everywhere (CAT:ABL, WP:BL). I hope that someday people will come around to see that this is really the best way to go! _└^Jared_┘^┌_talk^┐ 12:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't confuse policy with essays - I like your essay, but knowing the user has 3K edits etc gives me a bit more peace of mind when making a final decision. Spawn Man 03:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying that having 3,000 edits is a bad thing- it does make it easier to make a decision. But strict limits ("I won't support this user, because he only has 2,700 edits") are a bad thing. Ral315 » 19:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just needs one thing

Show me an effective way to desysop that's as easy as an RFA and doesn't involve a month-long arbitration process. Then I'll buy this argument completely. Friday (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That way lies madness, I think, because it allows unpopular, but correct, decisions to result in requests for de-adminship (successful or not, it's quite stressful). In serious cases (Robdurbar, and the Daniel Brandt wheel war), I think the committee and Jimbo have shown themselves willing to desysop users while waiting for an arbitration case; otherwise, I think that the admin can keep their rights while the case is debated. I do understand your concern; however, I've not seen a case where an admin awaiting a desysopping has abused the tools. Ral315 » 04:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why would it allow such a thing? A crat would still have to judge consensus. They already ignore things like "Oppose- this editor complained at me when I was edit warring." Spurious calls for removal of the buttons can be disregarded just as easily. Friday (talk) 16:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See here for a list of reasons why I think this would fail (particularly Quickpolls). Ral315 » 22:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is like my own standard

It is not that hard to de-sysop an administrator. If I am correct, a recent compromised administrator account was de-sysoped within minutes. To bad more users don't go this way. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 23:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]