User:DeeM28/Meta extensions and settings policy

'''This is a drafted policy. Please do not vote and let me know if you have suggestions or feedback. You can also add any proposals that you think are relevant or necessary. Thanks! DeeM28 (talk) 17:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)'''

It has been made evident during the latest discussions held on Meta, the one regarding the Report extension and the latest regarding Labeled Section Transclusion that there are quite a few disagreements between users regarding whether bureaucrats (and Stewards?) are allowed to activate extensions or change settings on Meta without an explicit discussion or consent having been given by the community. Some are of the view that nothing should be possible without an explicit discussion, others of the view that a broad approach should be taken. What is quite clear to me personally is that because of these differences in opinion, the Meta community must decide via RfC what the approach should be moving forward, as the status quo which is unclear and disputed can not be preserved, and a clear approach must be adopted.

I will therefore, as is the RfC 'tradition' propose multiple options and variants. DeeM28 (talk) 17:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposal 1 (Management)

 * Since Meta is the central wiki, Meta Bureaucrats and Stewards are responsible for the management of Meta's extensions and settings. They may request (or effect, if a Steward) a change to Meta's settings or extensions, subject to limitations under this policy.

Proposal 2

 * Meta Bureaucrats may choose to enable an extension or change a setting on Meta without a full discussion when the following conditions are met:
 * the extension/setting does not change the current workflow of the wiki
 * the extension simply adds a trivial or minimal aspect to the wiki


 * If in doubt about whether the conditions are met, the Meta Bureaucrats should refer the proposed change for discussion.

Proposal 3.1

 * In addition to the conditions proposed one is added:
 * the proposed change is advertised on Administrators' noticeboard and 24 hours are made available for any possible opposes by the community

Proposal 3

 * If an extension does not meet the criteria specified in the Proposal 2 (and 2.1, as voted) it must be discussed via Administrators' noticeboard or any other appropriate venue before it is enabled. The discussion should stay open for at least five days, and a bureaucrat will decide whether there is consensus for the extension to be enabled or the setting to be changed.