User talk:Mcginnly/Sandbox/Policy ideas

Overview comments
In gross, the idea is fine. This isn't something that has been broached before, that I know of, and it nears the territory of a few other approaches. Some people have argued that a thing we need to do is create some administrative position beside the current one, that we can split the functions as well as the powers of administrators into separate classes. Therefore, if we decided that the block button was the most destructive or misapplied, we could also change the classification of those who got that button. I rarely use mine, for example, while Bishone does a great deal of protecting the site from POV vandals and sockpuppets. On the other hand, I might be a more wise "delete/undelete" arbiter than some folks. Therefore, one person might be an article specialist and deletion specialist, while another is a block specialist, etc. That, however, is on the admin side. On the target side, establishing a low and nearly automatic threshold for an improved status seems at first blush to be a good idea. It would, I think, necessitate the implementation of another thing, though.

Right now, blocks are done on an emergent basis and on a long basis. I.e. "Someone is putting the penis picture on the FA" is an emergency block. "This person keeps reverting the UFO article" is a slower one. The UFO foil haberdasher might get to established user status quite quickly. Therefore, I think you're requiring a secondary blocking page. This is something I have some thoughts on as well.

Without getting into too much detail (this is the overview comment), I imagine AN, AN/I, and AN/B: a new page for blocks. This page would not be where we announce blocks that have been made (that's still AN/I), but where we would hang block plans for established users or any non-emergent situation. My view is that community blocks and bans (especially bans) need a full community of people to review, a long time before implementation, and unanimity among administrators (I'm talking about the "blocked indefinitely for exhausting community patience"). On the same page, the EU block targets could be listed, with diffs of the problem, and then no action to block go forward without consensus (not unanimity) after 24 hours. The mere 24 hour waiting period will allow passions to cool. However, it will still be the case that some are emergency blocks, and those, I think, will still have to be allowed. I can, I'm afraid, imagine sock puppets getting to EU status and then being used to hurl feces at an opportune time. If the abusive people know that they can get a free 24 hour window to hurl trash, it's not very fair. I.e. there still has to be some room for an emergency block. To prevent that (e.g. if Tony were to say that it was an emergency that he block Giano for 3 hours for being angry), perhaps any administrator who acts emergently on a non-emergency should have that action counted as one of three mistakes necessary for an "Administrators open to recall" or something. Geogre 21:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Cutting both ways
Thanks for your thoughts Georgre, I'll respond after shortly after some thought of my own.

Another thought in the interim is that the EU process should cut both ways - editors should spend some time RC patrolling, AFD'ing etc. I've done a bit in the past and was shocked at how much this site is vandalised by the minute (and also appalled at how unendingly dull dealing with it is). Bringing about an emergent class that has had experience in both fields must surely be a useful cultural change from the current system. Undertanding of each others positions will be so much easier if this were the case.

I think that admins should be mature, calm generalists to start with - If they would like to specialise later then thats find but lets have a culture that rewards both content and administrative actions from the start.

Maturity should definitely be a test in your derby - I've recently started asking "Under what circumstances would you block an established user?" at RfA - one girl recently told me she'd answer my question in a day or 2 because she had her english homework to do - when she did answer I'm told she'll block anyone for operating a sock puppet and can't distinguish between vandalism and dissent......The vote is currently 50odd for and 2 against. That said I'm sure there are plenty of whizz kids out there that are outstanding admins - but their emotional and social maturity needs a better test than all their IRC/high school mates piling in to RfA to support.--Mcginnly | Natter 13:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)