2,513
edits
TestWiki talk:Inactivity/Exceptions: Difference between revisions
Add topic
m
Updating transclusions and wikilinks, using a piped link where possible to preserve the name at the message posting time
(→Inactivity exemptions for consuls: ce-clarify and add to own comment) Tag: 2017 wikitext editor |
m (Updating transclusions and wikilinks, using a piped link where possible to preserve the name at the message posting time) Tag: 2017 wikitext editor |
||
Line 25:
Is it a good idea to grant inactivity exemptions solely due to being a consul and nothing else? I don't see why simply being a consul should result in an exemption. In addition, the inactivity policy describes itself as being "for mostly security reasons", which arguably makes it ''more'' important to remove inactive consuls than inactive sysops/bureaucrats. [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]] ([[User talk:Naleksuh|talk]]) 05:06, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
:Good thinking, and I '''support'''. However, perhaps this should be discussed on a more high traffic page, such as [[TestWiki:Community portal|the community portal]]. [[User:
:While I can understand the logic behind [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]]'s thinking here, I would just like to point out that removing the inactivity exceptions for [[TestWiki:Consuls|Consuls]] would ''not'' apply to the <code>[[TestWiki:Consuls|consul]]</code> user group as there is no inactivity clause in the given current [[TestWiki:Consuls|official policy]] for that user group. As such, it would apply ''only'' to the <code>[[TestWiki:Bureaucrats|bureaucrat]]</code> and <code>[[TestWiki:Administrators|sysop]]</code> bits that the Consuls could hold. While this is certainly ''possible'' to do, it seems a tad bureaucratic to require a less active [[TestWiki:Consuls|Consul]] to have to procedurally re-add their own <code>bureaucrat</code> and <code>sysop</code> bits. Additionally, I would also point out that other than several non-[[TestWiki:Consuls|Consul]] users, there are several inactivity exemptions for users holding no local user groups. Finally, while it's possible some Consuls are less active on TestWiki, they are not necessarily inactive pan Miraheze since many, or most rather, barring one exception, hold various global permissions, and are indeed quite active across Miraheze. So, there is never really any doubt as to ''where'' they are, if not on TestWiki specifically. As a procedural footnote, [[User:
| |||