Last modified: 2014-07-30 22:49:43 UTC
The listadmin is atm Avatar [Commons-l list run by wikipedia-listadmin at computerkultur.org]. He is inactive (desysopped because inactivity time ago - https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1593048#Inactive_.40_Commons) not responding to mails etc. I request to set up two new listadmins. Thank you
(In reply to Steinsplitter from comment #0) > The listadmin is atm Avatar [Commons-l list run by wikipedia-listadmin at > computerkultur.org]. He is inactive (desysopped because inactivity time ago > - https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1593048#Inactive_.40_Commons) > not responding to mails etc. > > I request to set up two new listadmins. > > Thank you Hey Steinsplitter, For a change like this we generally need some kind of community consensus. I'm open for debate if someone feels otherwise but I personally would be happy with a consensus of those interested either on the mailing list itself or on wiki since it's a project based list.
I don't like to start a RFC because of a list. Not sure if it make sense to have someone as listadmin who has edited 2012 the last time and who is no longer a commons sysop.
(In reply to Steinsplitter from comment #2) > I don't like to start a RFC because of a list. Not sure if it make sense to > have someone as listadmin who has edited 2012 the last time and who is no > longer a commons sysop. Please calm down. I guess the RFC is asked to decide the *new* listadmins, and not to remove the current inactive one. The bug, as it is now, can't be worked, because you requested to set up two new listadmins, but you didn't say *who* are those new listadmins. The decision of who should be listadmin is what requires community consensus.
Sorry? Please note i am not native speaker and i was never claimed up. I did not think that it requires so much bureaucracy. O_o
It's not "much bureaucracy" (plus bureaucracy traditionally is not a bad word). It's about creating public consensus who should be list admin *instead*.
(In reply to James Alexander from comment #1) > For a change like this we generally need some kind of community consensus. > I'm open for debate if someone feels otherwise but I personally would be > happy with a consensus of those interested either on the mailing list itself > or on wiki since it's a project based list. Agreed. Well said. My recommendation would be to find two to three list moderator candidates and start a discussion on the associated mailing list. If there are no objections and the candidates seem broadly acceptable to the mailing list participants, the candidates should be made list moderators. (There may be a subtle distinction between "list administrators" and "list moderators" though who knows.)
Hi guys, Avatar here - Casey Brown notified me about this discussion. Sorry if I'm hard to reach. If there is anything I can do from my side to ease up the situation/help let me know. Due to time restraints I won't be able to restart "active duty" as listadmin but happy to "hand over the torch" when we do have some consensus. Bye, Avatar.
(In reply to Tim Bartel from comment #7) > Hi guys, > > Avatar here - Casey Brown notified me about this discussion. Sorry if I'm > hard to reach. If there is anything I can do from my side to ease up the > situation/help let me know. Due to time restraints I won't be able to > restart "active duty" as listadmin but happy to "hand over the torch" when > we do have some consensus. > > Bye, Avatar. Thanks Avatar, Once new admins are found (I know a discussion has been started on list) if you're able to help that would be great. Essentially you would need to hand them the password (since it's shared) and without you I would have to create a new password and reset it.
