Wikipedia talk:Requests for bureaucratship/NonvocalScream
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Djsasso
- Only crats can comment in RfBs as far as I know. Pmlineditor ∞ 07:49, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- IIRC, an endorsement by two current bureaucrats is enough to promote unless there are valid objections raised. I'm looking for a link, but am having some trouble finding it. Lauryn (u • t • c) 07:53, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- (Not meant to comment per above, but...) Here's the link. SS✞(Kay) 08:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I was referring to the discussion that we had when we decided to change the policy, but thank you. :) Lauryn (u • t • c) 08:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, right. Sorry. Question though; where does it say only crats can comment? SS✞(Kay) 08:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I was wrong. I think the promotion depends on whether at least two crats support while others can comment. After 24 hours, if any valid objection is raised, then it becomes a full fledged RfA. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Does the request have to last 7 days (would make sense, so all crats can se it...). Yottie =talk= 08:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I was wrong. I think the promotion depends on whether at least two crats support while others can comment. After 24 hours, if any valid objection is raised, then it becomes a full fledged RfA. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:36, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, right. Sorry. Question though; where does it say only crats can comment? SS✞(Kay) 08:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I was referring to the discussion that we had when we decided to change the policy, but thank you. :) Lauryn (u • t • c) 08:07, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- (Not meant to comment per above, but...) Here's the link. SS✞(Kay) 08:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- IIRC, an endorsement by two current bureaucrats is enough to promote unless there are valid objections raised. I'm looking for a link, but am having some trouble finding it. Lauryn (u • t • c) 07:53, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
┌──────────────────────────┘
No, only 24 hours if no valid objections are raised. Pmlineditor ∞ 08:53, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Then the system is bad. Yottie =talk= 09:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- I would tend to agree with Yottie; 24 hours seems too fast. Someone may have a valid objection, but not sign on every day. Lauryn (u • t • c) 10:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- The whole point of this system was to make getting crat automatic for all admins (who wanted it) unless there was a valid concern raised. We were trying to eliminate RfBs completely to eliminate the bureaucracy (ironically). -DJSasso (talk) 16:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- It may need to be revised then. Yottie =talk= 16:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Revised how? The whole point is that any admin is able to become a crat now automatically once they meet the requirements and have two current crats endorse the request. The whole reason we created this system was to eliminate completely the voting and the 7 day wait, we specifically created this system so we didn't have to run an RfX to become a crat. Technically all this is supposed to be is a notice that NVS requested the bit, it is supposed to list his two supporting crats. And then its supposed to have a section for people to bring up concerns. There is not supposed to be any supporting/opposing like a normal RfX. This is only meant to be a notice of request. -DJSasso (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- It may need to be revised then. Yottie =talk= 16:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- The whole point of this system was to make getting crat automatic for all admins (who wanted it) unless there was a valid concern raised. We were trying to eliminate RfBs completely to eliminate the bureaucracy (ironically). -DJSasso (talk) 16:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- I would tend to agree with Yottie; 24 hours seems too fast. Someone may have a valid objection, but not sign on every day. Lauryn (u • t • c) 10:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)