Welcome to the Club Penguin Wiki! Log in or Create an account to join the community!

Club Penguin Wiki:Archive/Demotions (of inactive users)

From the Club Penguin Wiki, the free, editable encyclopedia about Club Penguin
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Historical Page (Archived)
This page is about something that no longer applies to the Club Penguin Wiki. It has been kept for historical purposes.
Notes: n/a
Forums: Index > Help desk > Archive/Demotions (of inactive users)



The operation is closed, it was a success!


I am going to start something that should've been done. The demotion of users no longer active or editing. That way, it may open up some space for newer users. If you disagree, just let me know on this forum.

Thanks, and have a great day.

--Hat Pop Bunny Ears Rule!

Okay, I've done good so far in this project. If another bureaucrat agrees, can I have some assistance with this? It's a lot to do by myself.

Thank you all for your support, and have a wonderful day!

--Hat Pop Bunny Ears Rule!


Comments?

  • Exactly! I mean, (and i'm not saying it will happen but if it did...) what would happen if we had about 20 adimins or rollbacks? Inactive ones have to be demoted.--EuropeaTalk to me 22:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I agree... we need some new fish round here. Go to Sith Cub's Userpage Go to Sith Cub's TalkpageHave fun on Sith Cub's Community Pages!Stuck with Part of the Wiki? Get Help!Take part in Organised Community Events!
  • Hat Pop, remember our discussion at IRC about this. I said we should give them this message: Rollback powers should only be given to users who regulary prevent vandalism. Rollbacks have 2 weeks to prove themselves, and if they prevent at least 10 pieces of vandalism, participate in a non-vandalism project, or do something significant about vandalism, they keep their powers. Rollbacking isn't another step towards sysop powers. It is simply an ability to have an extra button which can remove vandalism with ease. It is not a ranking of any sort.

Also, sysop powers should only be given to users who regularly edit, participate in user projects and move the wiki forward in any way possible. It should not be given to users who have 1000 edits, with 900 of them being talk edits. It should be given to users who help an article become featured, make more pages, help the wiki get a spotlight or help the wikia have 1000 articles for example. These are all good examples of things that should be noted when making a user an admin. Yet again, sysopship is not a rank or a step towards being a beauracrat, it is the chance of getting extra abilities to help the wiki become better. The wiki is for visitors, remember, not the users. Take this in, and note this when doing stuff like "promoting". --TЙГЭPHO3Ь (Chat|Edits|Vandals) 13:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

  • We came to conclusion ages ago that demoting inactive sysops would only annoy them if they ever came back and that it only helps us stastically, which in reality doesn't help us at all. Also, it's pretty disrespectful. The old user's of this wiki's legacy should stay.

--4th hale (talk) 14:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

    • I understand that, 4th hale, but what's the point of those user having that power if they never really use it anymore? It would open up some space for the newer generations of users here...and anyway, I'm thinking about shutting down promotions entirely, simply because we have too many of everything. As many have already said, "We're giving away powers like candy"., which is very true.


There are too many rollbacks, yes, it's true. 50 is a lot for one Wikia alone.

There are too many administrators; half of which were completely inactive before demotion.

Too many bureaucrats. Although only about 2 or 3 of the NINETEEN bureaucrats are active, that's really all we need.


Sorry 4th, but nearly everyone else agrees, and I have to do what the people wish. Unless more people disagree, the plan must go forward. Once again, I apologize.


And Patchy, is the only thing you care about here is administrator or rollback powers? I think the articles and the audience are way more important. (No offense).

Have a Wonderful day,

--Hat Pop Bunny Ears Rule! 15:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Though I agree with 4th Hale, I suppose it'll be this way. --☺ƒгәӘ╚σн☺ 17:26, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

  • They won't come back. They haven't for 2 years. We will give it back to them if they decide to rejoin, of course, but they won't. Another wiki had to sacrifice it, when they took away powers from the creator of the wiki because they werinactive. --TЙГЭPHO3Ь

(Chat|Edits|Vandals) 19:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

  • I agree, inactive users would be warned, then if they're still inactive, they'll be demoted. But the problem is, like 4th Hale said, is that users that quitted, and comes back later would be frustated. I agree 50% with the idea, users that quit (at least the users who said that they may/will return) should not be demoted, althrough, like I said, we send a warning mesage to the inactive users that hasn't quit, so if they're still inactive after the warning, they'll be demoted. --Staffan15 Everything has a beginning, everything has an end. 19:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Ditto Staffan--CatZip888 10:35, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrats too?

Hey all! I'm quite excited about what you all did above, and I'm glad we managed to do that. There's one thing that we couldn't do due to inabilities, which is demote the inactive bureaucrats, and is actually possible to get done if we can get a consensus on it. I'll list off these users so that you can know exactly who we're talking about too. The big problem with the list now is that there are 19 bureaucrats, with at least 7 just inactive users, and a whole lot of extra accounts with the flag.

  • Just a note, Staff, and several other users here (myself included) think there are too many 'crats and even the sysop list is still long, so can you guess one factor as to why you lost the right to promote new bureaucrats? This is one step of the solution.
Also, I know most of you are against demoting V-Rex (founder, I understand) and Robbsi, even though the chance they'll even sign in again is unlikely, it's up to you. Basically for them, I'm neutral.

Inactive bureaucrats

Tdcool

Aquajet

Dogdude87

MrPerson777

Steelers Fan11

Tigers Fan16

Bluehero

(If there is someone else that should be on this list, or you think shouldn't be on it, please tell me before voting. Thanks!)

The way I see it, is that they'll unlikely never come back, and if they do decide to one day, we'll be able to re-grant their rights. (We'll regain those rights if you just do the right thing) So it's not permanent, unless they come back and become active. Think of it like this: Bureaucrats really can just promote/demote new users, but right now just promote rollback, and demote sysop/rollback, and these guys aren't utilizing their tools because they can't. Having a smaller list will mean less 'crats to think about, make decisions easier, and may somewhat evolve into bureaucrat requests in Autumn. You never know...

I believe this is the right choice, and it follows what we did with the sysops. I support this fully and hope this will lead to the resurrection of CPW. So, what do you think? NOT A STAFF OR HELPER — Joey aa 16:46, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Support

Neutral

Oppose

Retrieved from "https://www.clubpenguinwiki.info/index.php?title=Club_Penguin_Wiki:Archive/Demotions_(of_inactive_users)&oldid=425860"