2,513
edits
TestWiki:Community portal: Difference between revisions
+ Policy-compliant proposal(s)
(→Community Ban Request: ApexAgunomu: + close) Tag: 2017 wikitext editor |
(+ Policy-compliant proposal(s)) Tag: 2017 wikitext editor |
||
Line 379:
----
</div>
== Community advisory opinion to [[TestWiki:Consuls|Consuls]] regarding [[User:ApexAgunomu|ApexAgunomu]] ==
RhinosF1 initiated a ''community ban'' proposal re: [[User:ApexAgunomu|ApexAgunomu]] the other day. Granted, in the past, community "bans" ''may'' have taken place, they are, not, however, supported by [[TestWiki:Policies|official policy]]. [[User:Reception123|Reception123]], as one of two TestWiki co-founding Consuls (alongside NDKilla), and I are wanting to retain TestWiki's spirit of [[w:WP:AGF|assuming good faith]], having only a [[TestWiki:Policies|a very few official rules]].
The excellent [[Special:AbuseFilter/60|abuse filter]] [[User:Chrs|Chrs]] created, at my request and having had the support of [[User:Reception123|Reception123]] and [[User:Agent Isai|Agent Isai]], seems to be, for the most part, doing its job. If RhinosF1 is bothered by seeing abuse log hits in the [[libera:#miraheze-feed-test|#miraheze-feed-test]] on [[m:IRC|IRC]], he can easily instruct StreamBotMH to !ignore <code>ApexAgunomu</code> in the channel. Or, alternatively, he can add the <code>[[TestWiki:Flooders|flood]]</code> to ApexAgunomu. Crucially, though, as I and [[User:Reception123|Reception123]] have said elsewhere, any <code>[[TestWiki:Bureaucrats|bureaucrat]]</code> can feel free to tweak the abuse filter in question, to catch anything we've not yet identified.
Secondarily, as RhinosF1 has not demonstrated a [[w:WP:AGF|good-faith and -intentioned]] effort to propose alternative solutions for discussion, on a non-binding and advisory basis, of course, he has not met the high burden such a block would need. Likewise, he has similarly ignored ApexAgunomu's offering of other alternate solutions.
[[User:AlPaD|AlPaD]] and likely [[User:HeartsDo|HeartsDo]]'s comments above show frustration, but ''do'' show that willingness to accept good-faith and to being amenable to alternative solutions. Thus, taking that all into account, I'm proposing the following proposals, each with support sections. Oppose sections are unnecessary, as each proposal would be mutually exclusive of each other, and [[TestWiki:Consuls|Consuls]] would take both the ''number'' of support !votes ''and'' the ''quality'' and ''strength'' of any arguments into consideration in effecting any outcome. [[mh:meta:User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 05:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
=== Proposal 1: Status quo + extension of abuse filter restrictions ===
ApexAgunomu is subject to the [[Special:AbuseFilter/60|strict abuse filter]] restrictions, originally slated to lapse this week, for an additional thirty days. Consuls will consider the ''severity'' and ''number'' of hits after thirty days in determining whether there has been sufficient improvement to warrant easing or removal of the abuse filter restrictions. Any <code>[[TestWiki:Bureaucrats|bureaucrat]]</code> may add to the abuse filter where ApexAgunomu is getting through the abuse filter.
==== Support ====
=== Proposal 2: Proposal 1 + !ignore ApexAgunomu on [[m:IRC|IRC]] ===
'''Rationale:''' To ease RhinosF1's stress of seeing abuse filter hits by ApexAgunomu
==== Support ====
=== Proposal 3: Proposal 1 + 2 + two-way interaction ban between ApexAgunomu and RhinosF1 ===
'''Rationale:''' Given the history between ApexAgunomu and RhinosF1, and RhinosF1 leaping to a community ban not supported by [[TestWiki:Policies|official policy]] and not having made ''any'' attempt to modify the [[Special:AbuseFilter/60|abuse filter]] [[User:Chrs|Chrs]] so awesomely created. This would not preclude any other Consul from blocking ApexAgunomu, if required.
==== Support ====
=== Proposal 3: Block ApexAgunomu for 30 days ===
'''Rationale:''' The abuse filter ''may'' have become untenable and the user's [[w:WP:AGF|good-faith]] repeated abuse filter hits are continue to demonstrate that they're not making progress required to restore [[TestWiki:Administrators|sysop]] and [[TestWiki:Bureaucrats|bureaucrat]]. That being said, the user is making ''very good'' reports on [[m:IRC|IRC]] to the [[m:Counter Vandalism Team|CVT]] team and to Stewards on [https://testwiki.wiki/ Test Wiki], which ''has'' to be taken into consideration. As such, if they can go thirty (30) calendar days from imposition of the block, that alone [[rfc:2119|''should'']] demonstrate enough capacity to warrant disabling of the abuse filter and full restoration of the [[TestWiki:Administrators|sysop]] and [[TestWiki:Bureaucrats|bureaucrat]] permissions. As such, if this proposal passes, they are blocked for thirty (30) calendar days and, if they go the full thirty (30) days, ''without'' [[w:WP:SOCK|sockpuppetry]], they are unblocked by a Consul and their rights restored.
==== Support ====
| |||