Requests for Stewardship

Dmehus' Revocation of Stewardship

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * With regarding to the concerns raised regarding my improper closure of a TestWiki community ban discussion, as a TestWiki Consul, as I already clarified, that was due to a misunderstanding on my part that because there was no global policy on global bans (and, indeed, no local TestWiki community ban policy), that the proposed community ban was therefore procedurally invalid. At the same time, it's worth pointing out that RhinosF1, as another TestWiki Consul, made no attempt to consider ApexAgunomu's counter-proposal in that discussion and, similarly, had not made any attempts to modify the local guidance abuse filter that Chrs had set up on TestWiki with my support and the support of another TestWiki Consul and several other active TestWiki users. My subsequent closure of this global ban discussion for Matttest was also based on that misunderstanding. It's worth noting, too, that several other users, including Reception123 and Agent Isai, agreed that the procedural issues around global bans, where no policy existed, was also far from clear. That being said, it was a mistake on my part to have closed that discussion without having first seen the thread on my user talk page, which I acknowledged. I even went further and stated that I would not overturn a community ban discussion, or, indeed, close any RfC related to global bans...period. As to the point about supervotes, a supervote is, as it sounds, by casting an opinion to effect consensus where there is not consensus. There has been no suggestion that I have ever done that. My closes have always reflected the consensus. I will note, though, that my RfC closes have been long-winded and often included explanatory comments. I do this to assess the arguments made, to illustrate to the community my thought processes that go into assessing consensus, as many have rightly noted that different Stewards will have different assessment processes for assessing consensus of RfCs and, certainly, global permissions requests, too. That being said, while the closes have always reflected the consensus, at times, some of my explanations or administrative points as to how the new or revised policy may relate to existing conventions or policies may have veered into the territory of editorializing. On that point, which many users may have missed it, but I went further when I said I intended to refocus my Steward activities to my CVT work, to which there's been no issues. It was, perhaps, too buried and too subtle, and I should have articulated that response more clearly and in a more prominent location (community noticeboard would've also worked, too). I would've thought that my enforcement of ApexAgunomu's community ban, which I may have disapproved of and would not have been opposed to a Steward relocking the user per the terms of their conditional unlock, would have demonstrated my commitment to enforcing the community's resolve (regardless of whether I may have disagreed with it or not). Finally, I will just note that in everything I do, the community's wishes have always been at the top of my mind, and I am always looking out for the community, most notably when it comes to SRE's plans to implement significant global MediaWiki configuration changes. I have always advocated for community discussions or RfCs, initiated by SRE and assessed & closed by an uninvolved Steward, and that view resolve has not changed. That being said, while I view this revocation request as an overly blunt instrument by a proponent who has made no attempt to engage with me on my user talk page in an attempt to resolve any outstanding questions or propose a solution (such as a temporary restriction on closing RfCs, if they felt that was needed), as the ultimate demonstration of my commitment to putting the community first, even though this may add to the workload of the other active Steward, I'm ✅ my Steward permission, though I will not be leaving Miraheze, and will seek the community consensus to re-run for Steward a later date. I will, however, instead be focused on co-drafting and co-sponsoring an array of policy or policy amendment proposals, and focusing on my other roles (both community, as a TestWiki Consul, interwiki administrator, etc., and with Miraheze Limited as a member of the Trust and Safety team). On that point, my real life commitments, particularly my real life occupation, have kept me pretty busy and precluded some Stewards activities as I would've otherwise liked, which is another reason for the improper editorializing and, thus, recent bad RfC closures, so that caused me to be "stretched too thin," essentially. This should alleviate those extra pressures, and, in due course, I expect to be a better position with respect to committing more time to Steward duties and having learned from this experience. Dmehus (talk) 04:10, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello all, again, after more than a year, I am opening a discussion on revocation of Dmehus's steward permissions. Firstly, Steward is permission that should allow the user to help the community, which is clearly not the case, exactly opposite. Let me remind you de-steward request from February 2021 and de-sysop request from April 2021. I will not repeat previous issues, please refer to discussions linked above. - I dare say that some issues continue, perhaps on a larger scale. I recently found with horror that his mannerisms against the community continue and there are more and more users who have doubts about his behavior, at that time we were 3-4, I think... In addition, he now ignores questions on his talk page, please see his user talk about Closures of Community Discussions - As before, he will write a long message, but you will not receive answers to your questions. Unfortunately, I have to say that many users, who supported him, now sit on the fence. I certainly did not mention everything that is needed, but the comment section is open. As I said last time (I think): Just because someone is helpful doesn't mean he can afford anything. Thanks,--MrJaroslavik (talk) 21:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC) EDIT 27.6.2022 - Added my comment from previous de-sysop request, lot of evidence from before, lot of things are unchanged: (Simply, I strongly recommend everyone, who blindly support him and oppose this request because "he is helpful", "i don't see issues", to read the archives linked above.)


 * 1) Yes,
 * He is editing user pages of other users -
 * He is editing archives after renames -
 * He often acts in cases where he is involved.
 * He referring to rules without thinking about other aspects.
 * He doing tasks while what he "just don't want to break anything" - for example
 * He editing posts of other users - for example
 * He doing oversight without request every time that some IP comment something, without request.
 * He doing CheckUser very often, see user rights log, sometimes leaving CU permissions for few days.
 * He doing revdels without need - see and those with perms
 * In revocation request about him he opposed this request about myself - bizzare and (globally) blocked IP that commented on this request, while there is NOP policy, this was unprecedented action, he really doesn't adress COI at all, see also support section in revocation request.
 * His bullying really isn't something that should be in this project - for example
 * and RfGR incident mentioned above is another bizzare thing...
 * and finally, he is very good in wikipedia:WP:LISTEN
 * For every one of those reasons I am voting for a full revocation of rights from Dmehus until he will adress all concerns.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 17:14, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * For "you should engage with him" peoples - no no no, when you trying to point out some issue (doesn't matter where), the result will be some long comment, where he refers to some WP policy, AGF, or some excuses, etc but without any result or self-reflection. Waste of time. That's fact.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 19:15, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I would also like to point out that, although I mentioned the RFGR incident in my comment, this does not mean that this is the only concern that exists and should be addressed. RFGR incident is, say, a mini-concern, unlike many others. I guess R4356th didn't mention more concerns because, for example, he didn't want his comment to be long or didn't want to sound biased. There are many other concerns that should be adressed,--MrJaroslavik (talk) 20:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * (Update 1.4.2021) So before this will be closed as unsuccesfull, i would like mention few things. There really isn't a personal problem with User:Dmehus. I do not know him as person, only as wiki user. This transfer of the problem to the personal level with sentence "You seem to have a personal animosity toward me.." is embarrassing and undignified. Whenever I tried to reach him via DM or something similar, also on discord server about my concerns, he replied to me with an excuse or a some Wikipedia Policy. So don't be surprised that some users (me included) don't want to reach him in DMs or get DMs by him, because it's unnecessary and demotivating. Another problem is its creation of its own policies, which it pretends to be official policies or established processes. He doesn't adress COI and similar things. He doesn't listen concerns of other users, or better, ignores them. But those who do not want to see these absolutely objective issues will not see them.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 15:06, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * (Update 9.4.2021) I forgot mention this incident - One from active users created page Users, about 10 minutes after, Dmehus deleted that page, with reason "I'm working on a draft of this page, so redeleting until that's finished" (log)- i don't think this behavior is fair. Also when i tried "engage with him", he ignored my message, so what you everyone want?--MrJaroslavik (talk) 19:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

And again, Being active and "helpful" cannot be the main argument for keeping of rights, if doing unacceptable things.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 14:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC) Also we shouldn't forgot his Wikipedia issues: Discussion, Block log,--MrJaroslavik (talk) 14:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If we removed Steward from everyone who’s blocked on Wikipedia, John wouldn’t be here. Hell, he’s ToU banned. The WNF’s actions have no affect on us. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 15:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not the only thing to think about. It only completes the image of the user.--MrJaroslavik (talk) 15:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * What did John do? -- Bukkit  [ cetacean needed ] 15:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that type of information cannot be revealed, as that is between the Wikimedia Foundation and John himself. Please do read this article, as that could be proven helpful. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Alright then. -- Bukkit  [ cetacean needed ] 16:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * 1)  A steward making supervotes, and acting without due regard of community opinions, and other opinions from other functionaries should be stopped. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 22:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don’t disagree that some of his actions have been questionable but consider his contributions to the community. He’s one of two active stewards and has been incredibly helpful in PTW consul roles, Meta admin, Steward, T/S team, and more. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 23:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * They can continue their role as consul, Meta sysop, and T&S. As for Steward, I haven't really seen them being "incredibly helpful"; I've just seen Dmehus act in their own interests. If you were involved in an AN case, one in which an administrator made an innapropriate block which, in combination with a bunch of other incidents, earned them an interaction ban with me. In this specific case, three Stewards agreed that they had behaved innapropriately. Who was the fourth? Dmehus. See below as well. The messages, and actions, go against Miraheze, and they created a lot of conventions that need undoing. Naleksuh (talk) 23:58, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) The supervotes are out of control. Another problematic example is deciding whether or not to cite Wikipedia based on whether or not the policy agrees with their own beliefs. For example they will cite Wikipedia guidelines or essays in warnings or blocks yet in Requests_for_Comment/Endorsement_of_Meta_conventions their own ideas which directly contradict full policies over a decade old are "common sense". In the testwiki ApexAgunomu incident, they closed a ban vote 8-0 as unsuccessful because "technically there's no policy about bans", yet made several other proposals, one of which was a block for 30 days (I saw through this as an attempt to protect the user, and immediately added another vote to block indefinitely. Also, they claim that they can't implement any ban because technically there is no policy by the letter, yet one of the proposals was an interaction ban (to try to make it partly another user's fault). I regret having supported an account only 6 months old as a Steward, and certainly won't do any such thing in the future. I believe Dmehus is acting in good faith but there have been far too many examples over the past few months and arguably entire year of going against the community, self-contradictions, acting in own interests, and others. I could list even more examples if I really felt like going down the rabbithole of Dmehus's contributions, but the point is made. Naleksuh (talk) 23:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Wow, I just read the original RfdS, and it's like a message from the future. when challenged, he just "can't understand why [the user] can't DROPTHESTICK." This is scarily correct, and reminds me of the Reception123 edit warring issue. It also looks like most of the opposes are just "oh maybe he'll improve" or "I haven't had any issues myself so noone else has". Evidently, it appears Dmehus has not improved. Naleksuh (talk) 00:09, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  This is the third time the community asking Dmehus’ steward rights to be removed concerning his behaviors, but the fact still appears that Dmehus has not improved. However, I would also like to point out although I support the removal of his rights, I do it reluctantly. Dmehus is active at SN, typically by helping users request for steward action, although they are being a little bit inactive recently. I am afraid that there will be not enough steward to handle the increasing amount of request, if Dmehus left. -Cheers, Matttest (talk | contribs) 01:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  I would like to start by saying that this is one of the hardest things I have ever had to vote on here at Miraheze. As I was also the original nominator of Dmehus as Steward, I never ever thought I would be making a supporting vote in the same user's revocation of rights. But the sad truth is, it has to come down to this.


 * For over a year, I have noticed little bits of things that Dmehus has done, which is unbecoming of a Steward. Most recently, the super-votes as already mentioned numerous times here, and has been brought up by John on his talk page, as well as in a reverted closure on Public Test Wiki. I no longer see that he has a full understanding of a Steward's duties. There has been numerous instances I can name, but I would rather not get into it at the moment. John also pointed some of the things Dmehus seemed to lack understanding of on both the reverted closure notice on Public Test Wiki, and in Dmehus' talk page here on Meta. There has been other instances of where I myself have been unhappy with the way Dmehus' has handled his Steward duties. There was even an instance that was brought upon by numerous factors, that got to the point that I myself considered permanently leaving Miraheze, due to my position in SRE, and the actions he has taken that continually clashed with SRE. However he has improved with that, there is one thing every now and than that ends up happening.


 * I had considered not even voting in this request to begin with, but as I thought it over, I figured I had to express my own vote here, or my own opinion has no legitimacy if I saw these come up now, and more issues arise later own, which seeing as how it has for over a year, seemed inevitable. He seems unable to take constructive criticism, and always must be right about his action. Always has a way to defend his actions rather than admitting his fault in the matter, and let it move on. There has been rare circumstances where he can admit his fault, and move on, but it is rare. Also, I initially considered opposing for the sole reason of we would loose one of the only active Stewards, but that fact I could not find another reason to oppose, made me rethink that position. I would also like to mention, that I do support Dmehus, and hope that he can simply learn from past mistakes should this request fail, and to finally be able to take the concerns of the community under advisement. But should it succeed, I do hope he remains as a Meta administrator, and public test wiki consul, but as far as Steward goes, I regrettable give my support for this revocation request due to all that I have mentioned above. Finally, I would like to make final note, that this revocation request is poorly structured to begin with, partly because the user making the request, has made it no secret that he hold his own issues against Dmehus, while I don't really hold anything against MrJaroslavik at the moment either, I thought it prudent to mention that, because I would have much more been willing to at least express the concerns, and vote in this if it were by a completely uninvolved user, but seeing as how that is not happening, I must still give my support to this request and hope the best of the future any way it goes. Universal Omega (talk) 04:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  I think it's quite sad to see this opened but it's also been something I've seen since the ApexAgumonu RfC as inevitable. Doug has had his trouble throughout his time as Steward that have been summed up by Universal Omega, Zppix in last year's request to desteward and in other comments here. The previous request to remove was too early and Doug did need a second chance and could have been fine as long as he listened. The issues here have been too much and without a satisfactory response to my letter on his talk page and with his diminishing activity and few actions resulting in controversy then I am without an option other than to state that I no longer have confidence in Doug as Steward and therefore removal of his Steward rights.  ~ RhinosF1 - (chat)· acc· c -  07:49, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  per
 * 3)  Regretfully, I feel like it is needed that I support. Now don’t get me wrong, he has helped me a lot during my “downfall” era of Miraheze, and gives people second chances, and overall helps Miraheze a bunch, but he has repeated patterns of “I didn’t hear that” and giving vague and unsatisfactory responses to issues. His supervotes, ignoring what the community has wished for, and only giving what he wishes to happen. From the previous revocation requests, it appears that he has barely changed. His failure to take accountability is also something, and as  has stated, users have been blocked, or even  banned for this, however,  has been doing this with little to no repercussions. He also seems to act like a Steward can do whatever they want regardless of the community, which on the landing page, it says “Miraheze is a not-for-profit, with a mission to provide a free community-centric wiki farm.” not a steward-centric wiki farm. I hope that Doug can resolve the issues, and address the mentioned situations. --  Bukkit  [ cetacean needed ] 14:38, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  This was not taken lightly, but unfortunately the various questionable actions that have been taken recently do add up, and Steward may no longer be a good role for them. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 16:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  – Regretfully, I agree with most of the users above and I think this is unbecoming. --Startus (talk) 16:46, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 6)  I deeply regret that this situation has deteriorated this far, but Dmehus's actions have destroyed my ability to trust his judgement. Sario528 (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 7) This is likely the hardest thing I’ve ever done on Miraheze. Dmehus has been there for me at every twist and turn, and to do this breaks my heart. However, I feel Dmehus’ pattern of behavior, as newly pointed out to me by other users, is hard to ignore. It is with great sorrow that I  this request. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 17:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 8)  I have no issue with Doug. He's helpful to be honest, He's active too (although, not recently). But the thing is there's been many issues just most recently with the way he handles steward duties. I am sincerely not being judgemental but No one knows what he's going through IRL, I mean, he could just be facing issues IRL, but yet, if I was Doug, and I know I am facing issues IRL, I'd just ask for a removal of my right or at the very least, take a wiki break. In my opinion, I would vote in favour of his rights being restored when he returns. Aside from the way he manages stewards chores, I'm sad to add that he feels too powerful. His comments in chats, talk page messages, and conversations that I have read come off as being too "I am the boss"-like. I am not supporting this request because of all these that I have said or anything that anyone has said, instead, I am supporting it because I want Doug to be even better, although it bothers me that it has to be this way. Last but not least, I believe that some users/people fail to grasp that Miraheze isn't Wikimedia. The former is very much community-centric, nobody receives a paycheck at the end of each week or month, nobody pays each other in money, and no one is a staff member per se, but for the latter, it is not exactly the same. If everyone starts being a boss and feeling big and people starts leaving Miraheze then imagine a brand without an audience, a platform without users, or Content without readers. --   Joseph  TB  CT  CA   22:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 9)  This has long been under my personal consideration, and from my perspective, I would even be comfortable as a co-initiator of this process had the opportunity presented and my activity supported it. It is clear that there is substantial history of inappropriate or conflicting interests in the actions pursued by this steward in the steward capacity. Dmehus is quite proficient with complex tools and the MediaWiki interface; unfortunately, technical competence is only a small part of the capacity of the steward. The several examples of failure to abide by or encourage consensus are well cited in the collapsible above, with some examples even supporting the notion of willful obstruction in matters which are personally inconvenient to Dmehus. While off-network examples are weak for the purposes of discussions affecting the Miraheze community, Dmehus has a history of unwillingness to maintain civility and a lawyering attitude toward process and policy reflected on Wikipedia. These actions have triggered responses which have gone so far as to outright ban Dmehus's participation in Wikipedia discussions not significantly related to the user. It appears to me that there was, in fact, a period during this user's stewardship in which special care was taken not to repeat such actions. It seems to have waned over time. I feel it important to again note the technical competence of Dmehus, and would willingly support an appointment to Global Sysop under the careful advisement of our stewards. The shortcomings of Dmehus do not make it impossible for the user to be a positive volunteer contributor to the global Miraheze community. The user is primarily a poor participant in procedure and policy who requires oversight and mentorship.  dross  (t • c • g) 02:40, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * , make no mistake. Here’s what I’ll say. This has been going through my mind since the RfS was created a few hours ago. I have been thinking hard about what to do, and in the end, the decision was easy. Dmehus may not be perfect, but no human is. Once we know what our mistakes are, we work to learn from them. I have, I know others have on Miraheze. Dmehus has room for improvement, and we’ve pointed that out. He’ll improve. He’s been an amazing friend to me from when I first started on Miraheze in September 2020. He’s been there for me through all my ups and downs, and those of you that remember, there were a lot. He’s given his heart to the Miraheze community in hopes of growing it and helping everyone out. In the end, I do not at all feel comfortable removing a member of the community that has done so much, especially with our current drought of stewards. Dmehus has made mistakes, but like all humans, he can and will change and evolve for the better. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 00:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This is the second time the community has been asked to evaluate Doug’s rights. To what end do we allow this behavior to continue? Should we just “hand him the keys” and just let people do whatever they want without consequence? Enough is enough, it’s only gone downhill since I opened the original request for revocation over a year ago. Stewards should be held to an extremely higher standard then any user, as they are a huge representation of Miraheze, every action they take can and will affect how Miraheze is seen from the public’s eye. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 00:52, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If not for anything else, think of it this way. If Doug was to leave, we’d have one active steward . Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 00:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * And? If that means we have one active steward that follows legitimate written policy and zero that don’t, I am perfectly okay with that. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 00:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree, the number of active stewards is not a reason to allow someone to blatantly violate the community's trust. Do we need them? Also, we would have two active stewards, John and Raidarr. Naleksuh (talk) 01:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * John’s intermittent. He’s not regularly active for regular steward activities. And yes, we do need him. He’s violated the community’s trust, but he can earn it back, I’m confident in that. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 01:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Why do you believe it will be earned back when this problem has been going on for over a year and they have not expressed any intent to change? Through what means will it be earned back? Naleksuh (talk) 01:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Look, as much as I find it annoying that Doug has ignored a few concerns here and there, but what makes you think the third time will change anything? My point about this being a losing battle still stands, despite a few instances where he just disappears until like a week later. Say whatever you want about my statement being delusional or convoluted at best, but I don't find this necessary in the slightest. And to, please actually listen to what the community has to say about your supervoting mentality. I wouldn't want you to lose your Steward flag, unless if you were to resign, which I probably won't see happening in the near future. I doubt the third time will change much substance here, I'm afraid. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 00:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC) Striking, and I will change my vote to abstain, as this is perpetually out of hand. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * what makes you think the third time will change anything? This is exactly what should be asking to the people opposing. This is not the first time Steward problems have been raised, and there is no indication of changing at all. They already went up for revocation once and people figured "well, maybe he will improve". He didn't, and has gotten much worse. To me, this sounds like an endorsement of Dmehus's actions, and since there is no indication of change there is no need to oppose while simultaneously telling the user that they need to stop and saying they may lose the flag while also complaining about repeated requests to remove the flag. Naleksuh (talk) 01:04, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That is true, and I cannot deny the very fact that his recent actions have been at best questionable (and at worst, annoying. For example, being inactive for long periods of time and not responding until the very last minute, which I could understand if he has family business or whatnot), but we already had 2 failed revocation requests which went nowhere, and if I could describe this in just one sentence, this would be it: We're becoming the very thing that we swore to destroy. In retrospect, I'm referring to this 3rd request against him, which I have a feeling won't get very far. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 01:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * 1)  Even if I am in the minority I have decided to oppose this request. There are two principal aspects in relation to this request. One of them is assessing Dmehus' behavior and actions as Steward and the other is determining whether it would be in the communities interest and for the greater good to remove Dmehus.
 * In relation to the first aspect there have indeed been enough questionable incidents including the most recent one in relation to ApexAgunomu which have clearly made the community doubt Dmehus' abilities to interpret their wishes. I believe that one of the main problems is that Dmehus sees the Steward role as one where the community has delegated a large amount of responsibility to Stewards similar to citizens electing representatives to national bodies. The issue is that within a smaller community this concept does not work and it is evident that the community prefers a more direct democracy approach where Stewards are to execute what the community wishes and refrain from enactments or interpretations inconsistent with the general will. To conclude the issue here in my view is that Dmehus' 'representative' means do not seem to represent the current community. Based on this factor alone and the general community feelings I would have tended to support this request but even so would have been doubtful given that in my view there is still more positive that is done by Dmehus which outweighs the few times where he makes a grave mistake such as the one with ApexAgunomu.
 * In relation to the second aspect it convinces me not to support this request. In principle and theoretically it should not be the case that there being few other Stewards is an excuse for current Stewards to stay. In practice my observations indicate that Miraheze is in a dire situation in terms of Stewards and it would be irresponsible to remove one and be left with three stewards which are not very active and especially not very proactive. Dmehus has made mistakes but it must be acknowledged that he has also done a lot of good work for the community and is able to resolve requests that otherwise would take more time to do. In a place like Miraheze ever volunteer counts and Dmehus' actions in my view are not so serious as to warrant having one Steward less in an already difficult environment where many things often do not get done on time. Finally I would add that activity wise it is a shame that Dmehus is no longer as active as he once was. --DeeM28 (talk) 09:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  I have never seen any abuse of rights by Dmehus, instead I consider him a helpful and kind user who gives second chances and forgives the mistakes of other users. AlPaD (talk) 13:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * His recent closures of community discussions appears that Dmehus didn’t improve from his previous mistakes, instead, goes against the community and close the discussions at his own belief. “I have never seen” should not be an argument, please look at the links mentioned above. -Cheers, Matttest (talk | contribs) 13:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * : No one seen issues with Dmehus. Cigaryno (talk) 14:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If no one has seen issues as you claim then we wouldnt be in this situation. I find the claim you make to be completely false. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 16:27, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but except for MrJaroslavik, Zppix, Naleksuh, Matttest, Universal Omega, 小美粉粉, Bukkit, and MacFan4000, no one has seen issues with Dmehus! Naleksuh (talk) 16:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Is the link to the YouTube video really necessary? Looking at the user's page, they self-label themselves as having a basic understanding of English. It is quite possible that they meant they personally have never had any issues with Dmehus. While I cannot speak for them, until they respond for clarity sake, I think that is the simplest explanation. --SchizoidNightmares (talk) 19:04, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Judging based on the evidence provided... I see no justified reason to revoke his stewardship. I reviewed all of the links provided in the "older comment" collapsible tab and found nothing objectionable or offensive in the slightest. I do agree however that editing archives is in general a bad idea as they are meant to be a pure historical record. However, on review of his edits, I did not find anything that would change the interpretation of the archive. The edits made seemed to be done in good faith and benevolently so. This is the same for his edits to user pages and user comments. I cannot for the likes of me find any reason to condemn someone for taking the time to correct minor spelling errors and formatting mistakes; or for responding to legitimate corrective requests. The "bullying" evidence would appear to be a wiki creation request, inside which I found no instances of bullying, insults, or harassment. The other issues mentioned seem to be a private dispute. --SchizoidNightmares (talk) 17:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Abstain/Neutral

 * I have no strong opinion, but I can agree that some of their more recent decisions have been questionable. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 00:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Some of my points I've added when I originally opposed this request still stands, but to counter my own points with some irony would have to be this: Over the past few months, I've been noticing him do something that I wasn't a fan of him doing, but some of the things he did were actually minor, such as questionably unlocking a few user accounts, then succeeding in relocking at least a few users (except for, as he actually appealed his lock via email from what I've been told by Doug) back up again. One of those instances occurred back in February, and mid-March. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 16:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Having seen both sides of the argument, I will vote neutral.  Hypercane  (  talk  ) 18:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  - I have been on Miraheze for over 2 years (not exactly my account, but my presence), and he's been very helpful. However over the past year I have been very inactive, so I can't say he was helpful if I haven't interacted with him in a while. So it's neutral. However I'm more likely to oppose his revocation of stewardship if you asked me 1 year ago. CRAB-2 (c) 21:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * 1)  I have been a bit disappointed in Doug's recent actions, but we're slowly becoming the very thing that we've sworn to destroy: The Doug drama, which unfortunately got out of hand quickly the last time I'm afraid. I wouldn't mind if he rethought about what he's been doing lately and actually re-read the policies first without it becoming a tedious chore. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think the frustration bearing here is that how many times do you ask someone to reconsider their actions and to explain them - for the response to ignore accountability and just go ‘well I did it because x’ to then next time do the same thing and yet again avoid accepting responsibility? We block users who do this, we’ve banned users who do this, why do we allow a steward to keep doing it and not face consequences for their actions? To call it drama is to illegitimise a genuine ongoing concern that Doug has failed to address and reassure a good portion of this community over. If it’s drama and only drama, can you get Doug to offer the explanation we’ve been waiting weeks for and have asked for numerous times over the past year and a bit? John (talk) 11:34, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You're not wrong here that it's been brought up on more than one occasion, but here's the thing: I've tried to get in touch with him through IRC, emails, and Discord, but no cigar as of yet. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:17, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Exactly - so in these circumstances, why indefinitely wait for a response we won’t get when the previous ones have been unsatisfactory? It’s not like this is a first explanation that we’ve rushed to get, it’s a long standing problem we’ve have numerous explanations around and they’ve been unsatisfactory or borderline satisfactory, none have been acceptable or confidence inspiring. John (talk) 12:40, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've waited for him to review some of the CU requests I've left on both Discord and on the Stewards' noticeboard, but some of those requests on the former were eventually answered by another Steward. I myself became quite concerned on where the actual problem lies. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 13:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Reception123's Nomination for Stewardship

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Successful, welcome to the team :) -- Void  Whispers 19:14, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

User: Reception123 ( contributions • CA • blocks log • rights log • global rights log )

Reasoning for request
As you all may know well, a major issue plaguing the Miraheze community as of late is the lack of active Stewards. With the recent resignation of Dmehus in his revocation, such issue is further aggravated as we in essence only have one active Steward. In light of this and after consulting several community stakeholders, I have decided to nominate Reception123 for Steward, with his consent of course.

Reception123 needs no introduction. Reception123 has been with Miraheze since the very beginning. In fact, he is user #19 globally having registered 11 hours after Miraheze was founded. I remember Reception123 well from a previous wiki farm project where a lot of long time Miraheze users originated from. Reception has shown an incredible determination and an astounding dedication to the project like many few have.

As a system administrator, you will always find him online tending to technical tasks along with the rest of the MediaWiki team. As a Global Sysop, he has a great track record in assisting and tending to global countervandalism tasks and requests. He has been a Global Sysop since the days back when the Global Sysop group was simply named " " and has been a Meta administrator since the very beginning not to mention a Meta bureaucrat too.

Reception123 has all the qualities I would want to see in an ideal candidate for Steward. He is amicable, kind, well mannered and above all, incredibly humble. He does not like to toot his horn and is always down to earth about himself. He may not been seen on-wiki all the time but he's always within reach and is usually working behind the scenes either in his role as MediaWiki Engineer or in a community role, assisting on Discord/IRC, discussing things to do and handle on wiki, collaborating and planning things out, etc.

Reception123's advice and reasoning is very sound and his input is always appreciated. Some current and former Stewards have referred to him as a de-facto Steward as many times, his input is used to help Stewards determine what course to take. He works closely with Stewards already and as he knows Miraheze well from the inside out, he provides very valuable insight into things and such valuable insight and experience would be a big net positive for the Stewards team. Many are surprised to learn that Reception123 is not a Steward. Having contributed since the beginning of Miraheze, one would assume that he'd be a Steward by now. He however occupies currently the position of Global Sysop and is always within reach when one requests help. He would make a great addition to the Stewards team and would certainly help out a lot.

For this reason, I formally nominate Reception123 for Steward. Agent Isai Talk to me! 05:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Acceptance: Thank you very much for the nomination and the kind words, Agent Isai! Over the years many people have often asked me to run for Steward or even assumed I was one, but I have declined each time as I've always wanted to focus on SRE. The reason why I have decided to accept this time is because it's clear that with the recent resignation there aren't enough Stewards to effectively work with communities and enforce Miraheze policies. That being said, I would like to mention a few things as to not create any false expectations. The first is that I will try to be as active as possible if elected but I'll still be needed at SRE and will need to dedicate time there too as there is also a lack of volunteers in that area. The second is that I wouldn't feel comfortable taking large unilateral decisions as Steward and would regularly seek advice/agreement from other Stewards in such cases. The third is that I enjoy initiating and participating in RfCs and would likely not be closing most of those for that reason. Finally, if I am given the opportunity to be Steward I will make sure to always have the community's interests at heart. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 05:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Questions for candidate

 * 1) Stewards are highly trusted users whom community hands over some of the extra responsibilities and buttons to work for the betterment of the community. While, you are indeed trusted and a long-term user, do you think you'd be able to be active enough given you're already a member of the SRE? Do you think your work as a steward (if elected) would affect your SRE work or vice versa? --Startus (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I obviously have considered this issue and that was the reason why I have never accepted to be nominated for Steward in the past. I have decided to accept this time because the alternative would be to have very few Stewards for many wikis and many issues. As I said in my acceptance, I don't claim that I'll be extremely active as Steward as I also have SRE responsibilities, but I'll try my best. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 11:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Nearly all the global or even local meta positions are held by (former) SRE members and we have rarely seen a user without the SRE background being elected as a global functionary. What are your thoughts on this and do you think there should be separation of powers? --Startus (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * In an ideal situation, the groups wouldn't overlap and it would be great to see more non-SRE members become Stewards. Unfortunately, there have been few candidates who fit the description for the role so far so until there are more talented volunteers who are trusted by the community to become Stewards the best solution is this. It is worth noting though that Void was Steward before being SRE and that as far as I'm aware neither his nor John's Steward actions have been negatively affected or influenced by their SRE status. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 11:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users
✅: Signed NDA With Miraheze Limited

Support

 * 1)  Per nomination.  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 05:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  I have nothing more to add to this request. I've thought that Reception123 should be steward for a couple years already. Definitely support. Universal Omega (talk) 05:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  No concerns, Reception123 is, without a doubt, trusted, kind, and thoughtful, and has the technical proficiency and policy knowledge for the role. Reception123 is also very fair, and would give due consideration to any user conduct appeals or difficult situations. We still have the same issues with a small, core group of functionaries holding multiple global roles, but holding multiple global roles isn't so much the issue, it's whether they have the time commitment to be sufficiently active. Dmehus (talk) 05:58, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  I have had the privilege of working with  on numerous occasions. Each time, no matter the circumstances, they have been extraordinarily kind and respectful, and always is trying to help wherever possible. They’ve been global sysop since before it was that, and I have a hard time imagining that anyone would oppose this request. As such, I’m throwing my support behind Reception123, who hopefully, will be our newest steward in a week or so. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 06:01, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  While they may get a lot more work, I think they're responsible enough to handle it. Firestar464 (talk) 06:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 6)  Very trusted and polite user. Also user is SRE Volunteers, sysadmin and global sysop. AlPaD (talk) 09:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 7)  Knowledgeable, active, thoughtful, and many other excellent qualities make this an easy decision for me. Sario528 (talk) 10:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 8)  Considering my abstain vote from earlier, this user has demonstrated that he is more than capable of having this right, especially since I am also supporting Agent Isai's request for Stewardship down below. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:13, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 9)  trusted. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 13:06, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * : One of the most trusted users I known. Cigaryno (talk) 13:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  trusted user. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 13:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  I have no concerns.  is extremely trusted and very kind. They had been a part of CVT for a very long time, back when it was called , and has been doing an extraordinary job as a Global Sysop, so I have no concerns in that field. He considers his actions before he executes them and asks questions when unsure, which is an amazing quality. --  Bukkit  [ cetacean needed ] 14:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  No concerns here. — Chrs (talk) 15:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  - Didn't I nominate him like 2 years ago? Anyways I still support. CRAB-1 (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Did you say 2 years ago? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 14:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Wait a minute, you're InspecterAbdel. How have you been since we last saw each other? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:39, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  I like Reception123's person, he's a cool man, the way he deals with things is outstanding; although it's still a PITA that I don't know his real names :) --   Joseph  TB  CT  CA   14:21, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Really trusted person and one of the first that I know from here when I join Miraheze, I am not doubt that he can handle these tools. HeartsDo (Talk / Global / Wiki Creator) 15:20, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Could use some new stewards. LetraSeca (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  Reception has been vital in keeping me motivated for the platform when certain situations or users have made me wish to resign. In CVT he is incredibly proactive for workflow and communication; with the tools he is a proven effective responder. Not to mention invaluable service in SRE, on Meta and in collaboration with current and past Stewards. Critically he likes to consult others before acting; this can only be good for steward collaboration and strength in decisions. Aside from that he gets along with a vast majority of people and is quite approachable. I've felt for some time that not being steward actually hinders his capabilities. So needless to say I'm quite in favor. --Raidarr (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  First of all I would like to mention the fact that as Naleksuh has pointed out I do not feel very comfortable with the fact that users on Miraheze have multiple important hats and dilute the separation of powers as well as have multiple responsibilities which will inevitably impact their work in each area in which they operate. Even if that is my general thought and I believe that it is very unfortunate that there are no other users who would be able to fill this position I think it is necessary to have more Stewards and for the time being people with multiple hats is the best solution. As others have pointed out above Reception123 appears to be quite active on Meta and elsewhere and has activated well as Global Sysop. I also appreciate the mention that they will not unilaterally take important decisions as Steward which I believe to be inappropriate for any single person to do. I do not have any other concerns with this candidate. --DeeM28 (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) . --Startus (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Abstain

 * I don't have a strong opinion on this one. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 10:00, 28 June 2022 (UTC) Striking my abstain vote, and moving it to support instead. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:10, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) I really don't like the idea of inventing rules (i.e. the edit warring situation, some stuff that has occured over IRC), and while I don't think it will be as bad as the supervoting situation, and how everyone in the previous RfDS overly fixated on that and not the other issues (hell, I was the first person to describe Dmehus's actions as supervoting, and now I hate hearing about it all the time), and Reception123 has done some stuff I approve of, I do still have some concerns about descision-making, which a Steward just lost permissions for doing badly mere hours ago. Also, Reception123 is SRE and I'd really not like to have mixing hats, or give the impression of a heirarchy or path of advancement. Naleksuh (talk) 06:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I will point out that both John and Void are SRE and stewards at the same time and nobody has taken issue with that, and to offset that we have Raidarr who isn’t SRE. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 14:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  per Naleksuh


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Agent Isai's Request for Stewardship

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Successful, welcome to the team :) -- Void  Whispers 19:14, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

User: Agent Isai ( contributions • CA • Isai blocks log • rights log • global rights log )

Reasoning for request
I would like to apologise in advance for my large textwall but I hope you consider all points here. TL;DR: I am running for Steward to help the community further wherever I can. I assist users a lot in my current role as a community member and CES on platforms such as Discord/IRC but I would love to help out more where I can. I am a strong believer in the community-centricness of Miraheze and would strive to continue ensuring Miraheze serves all its users well. While adding another steward like Reception123 would be very beneficial, especially in light of the recent resignation of Dmehus, I believe that by also having me on the team, Stewards as a whole would be able to action requests quicker and that all of us sharing our insight could prove very valuable. Below is an extended version of this TL;DR.

When I began my Miraheze journey on a fateful Tuesday afternoon in September 2015, I never imagined how far I'd get. I remember well the day I signed up for Miraheze. It was a chilly Tuesday afternoon in late September 2015. I was sitting in a car waiting for someone and was thinking deeply. Nearly 2 weeks prior, on September 16th, 2015, the wiki farm I used for my wikis (Orain) was compromised and kicked offline forever. During the entire incident, I was on IRC watching everything unfold in real time. In the aftermath, once we realized that Orain would never come back, we all looked for an alternative. A month prior, a new wiki farm started by two long time Orain users was opened. Many users suggested moving over to this new wiki farm but I was hesitant. I clung onto the hope that my wikis would be fine and that our wiki host would come back up in no time. As the week passed, most gave up and moved to other hosts or even self-hosted. I signed up purely out of curiosity for this new farm and saw many familiar faces. Their wiki request process also surprised me, it was unlike my previous wiki host where you made the request on a wiki page and someone went through a complex process of creating a wiki. It just worked. I requested a wiki a few months later and was impressed by the smooth process. I will never forget how amazed I was by the fact that Miraheze ran 100% free and always provided such excellent service in exchange for nothing. This left a lasting impression on me which I would not forget.

For years, I quietly observed the Meta community and how things came and went. I went on later to request a wiki or two which is how I would always come back to Miraheze. Finally, over a year ago, I decided to actually begin contributing to Miraheze. Initially, I returned to Miraheze to request wikis to help me archive a few wikis based around my favorite game. As the days went on, I began to participate more and more. Eventually, I became a wiki creator, then a global interwiki administrator, I joined the SRE team as Community Engagement Specialist and I currently serve as a Meta administrator.

Following the consultation of various community stakeholders, such patrollers, wiki creators, system administrators and various Stewards, I have decided to run for Steward in order to help out more where I can and further assist the community more in all the fields possible. I work closely with Stewards presently in my role as Community Engagement Specialist and have a good knowledge of global procedures and policies. I on occasions already assist Stewards in some cases to help reach a decision on some things or I provide my perspective which helps. I am always within easy reach by pinging me on Discord or IRC and am always on every single day handling Miraheze business, both on and off wiki as many users can attest to and as my contributions and chat logs can attest to too. I usually patrol all the noticeboards too and help users wherever I can, I also on occasions clerk the Requests for reopening wikis. In my time as CES, I have become aware that there is a large backlog at times for certain tasks such as abuse investigations, renames, case dispute resolving, along with other things. I often hear of Stewards saying that they do not have time to handle a certain issue or that they are awaiting the input of another Steward in order to advance in a case but as there is sometimes no other Steward to consult, often times there is a jam there which leads to some cases taking an incredibly long time to resolve. One of these cases which dragged out for a too long occurred recently and, in my view, it could have potentially been resolved in maybe even a day or at worst, a week. As a Steward, I would work even more with current Stewards and with the community to help resolve issues facing us in a more timely manner.

I have always had a strong desire to help Miraheze further advance and to help users so that their experience is as smooth as possible on here. To that end, I have tried to redesign many Meta pages to be more user friendly and intuitive, pages such as Help center, MediaWiki and many other pages. Many wikis can also attest to the fact that I have helped them move over to Miraheze in a manner as smooth as possible. I can count at least a dozen wikis which I have successfully helped move over to Miraheze. My goal has always been to help users have a smooth experience on Miraheze and to always be as satisfied as possible with our service.

As some of you may know, I organised our annual Fundraiser and wrote the CentralNotice banners for it. Everything I said on there was truly what I felt. One of the banners reads "Support a truly one-of-a-kind project." I truly do believe Miraheze is absolutely a one of a kind project like none other. There is no other wiki farm of this scale which runs completely on donations and listens to the community. Many users are left shocked when we reveal that we rely completely on donations and aren't backed by a large corporation. Such financial autonomy is priceless as it lets us truly put our users first, something which I love of Miraheze. Miraheze's community-first approach is what attracted me to this project and made me contribute. Knowing that users are listened to and that we take them always into account is wonderful, it instills trust in a process and lets users know that they are taken into account and that their word truly matters. Another banner reads "None of us get paid but we pour our hearts into our work and we hope you like our work too!" Is this not true of all our selfless volunteers? We all pour our hearts into this work and do this all in exchange for no payment. Personally, my payment is in the form of happy users. I am overjoyed when I see that I was truly able to help a user, that I really made an impact, that I solved an issue and that our users not only enjoy our service but even go as far as to recommending it to others and saying that we provide good service. That is enough payment for me and I cannot help but feel satisfied when that occurs.

I will admit, I did not initially plan to run for Steward. As I've always told everyone, I really never even planned to run for any positions at all, I was never in it for the 'hats'. What has propelled me to run now and what has made me run for all my other currently occupied positions is the desire to help other people and the seeing of help was needed. Given the recent resignation of Dmehus, I originally only planned to only nominate Reception123 for Steward but upon further consultation and urgence of various community stakeholders, I have decided to run. Reception123's input is deeply valued and is already used many times in taking decisions but it alone cannot be used to back up a decision as he is not a Steward so by elevating him to Steward, we would be able to fully use his input and reasoning to full use. However, as he stated in his acceptance, he does still have to devote time to being a system administrator, a field where there is a bit of a volunteer shortage. Thankfully, our current system administrators (not just Reception123) are ever so kind and go beyond the extra mile to handle everything but still, in the cases where Reception123 is not around, I believe it would be useful for me to also be there to assist. As I am usually around, much like him, I would be able to assist in anything needed. I believe having another active Steward would be helpful and as we'd have 3 Stewards who are usually around on Discord at all times, we'd be able to help resolve issues more quickly. All of us together sharing our insight would prove helpful in resolving issues and having extra manpower on hand would be very beneficial to the project, especially to handle larger tasks. Indeed, I know 2 Requests for Stewardship at the same time might seem weird but I do hope you consider all the points here. Thank you so much for your consideration and for reading through. Agent Isai Talk to me! 05:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Questions for candidate

 * 1) The concern of having one person with both SRE and Steward permissions is pressing. If passed, would you be willing to resign as SRE? Naleksuh (talk) 06:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Why is this a pressing concern or even remotely necessary when two of the most trusted platform's volunteers, Void (a board member as well) and John (surely you're not questioning him) are both Steward-SRE? From an activity perspective the case is weak, from a COI perspective it's clearly not a real issue. The division is an interesting technical question but it's a silly thing to enforce especially with our very sparse volunteering power. We should be building coordination, not trying to build walls. --Raidarr (talk) 11:12, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I would not be resigning from SRE but I do not believe there is a reason to worry if a user holds a position both within SRE and as a Steward. My role is the least technically involved out of all of the SRE roles so much so that I do not hold any on-wiki user rights related to SRE and I do not have any shell access apart from access to Bastion to allow me to securely access some internal resources like Graylog. As a CES/Steward, I would clearly set the boundary between these two roles and would not act beyond my capacity or "mix" these hats. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 15:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Stewards are highly trusted users whom community hands over some of the extra responsibilities and buttons to work for the betterment of the community. While, you are indeed trusted and a long-term user, do you think you'd be able to be active enough given you're already a member of the SRE? Do you think your work as a steward (if elected) would affect your SRE work or vice versa? --Startus (talk) 09:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I do believe I'll be around for a long time and have no immediate or future plans to lower my activity. I feel that I can handle both positions well and that neither will be detrimental to the other in the devotion of time towards it. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 15:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Nearly all the global or even local meta positions are held by (former) SRE members and we have rarely seen a user without the SRE background being elected as a global functionary. What are your thoughts on this and do you think there should be separation of powers? --Startus (talk) 09:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * In a more perfect world, we wouldn't have this overlapping and users would only occupy one role. Sadly, because of our volunteer strain, we have people who occupy multiple positions. There should and will continue to be a separation of power between SRE and Stewards as there always has been. Our current SRE-Stewards balance this well and I have faith that I will be able to too. The community will always come first and we will always listen to the community which is the most important. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 15:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Which areas do you think you can help out the best if you are elected as a steward? Cheers, Matttest (talk | contribs) 09:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I will definitely help out in various areas where potential backlogs can arise such as responding to email correspondence and reports, user renames, handling on wiki disputes (such as the one you're currently facing), assisting users better when requested on platforms like Discord and IRC, along with a multitude of other things. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 15:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) When you acquire the Steward hat, will you be helpful in sockpuppet investigations, especially if I have some to hand out in the future in case a couple of Stewards are busy with something else? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 14:02, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I will attempt to be as helpful as possible in investigating potential abuse. I have some experience with the CheckUser tool, primarily through my own private testing of the interface via a private test wiki, though I am by no means an expert in the tool and will definitely be conferring with other Stewards when unsure. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 00:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) How will you differentiate the work done in your capacity as SRE and Steward? What steps will you take to establish and reinforce these boundaries?  dross  (t • c • g) 20:36, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Unlike all other members of the SRE team, I do not hold any on-wiki system administrator rights so I do believe there will not be any issues regarding under what capacity I am doing technical actions such as user rights changes, ManageWiki changes, etc., as I could only do those using my Steward hat. The main actions which I do on-wiki as a Community Engagement Specialist are posting notices on behalf of SRE and posting Requests for Feedback. Both are clearly labeled as originating from SRE in my capacity as CES as I either begin the post by saying "SRE is requesting your feedback on..." or end it by saying "On behalf of Site Reliability Engineering..." If I were to ever be granted on-wiki system administrator rights, I would identify any action being done in my capacity as an SRE member by appending something around the lines of  to all log actions or I would consider creating an alternative account to clearly distinguish when I am acting as a community member versus when I am acting in my capacity as SRE member.  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 00:01, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * ✅ that user has a signed NDA with Miraheze Limited.

Support

 * 1)  As Engineering Manager for MediaWiki I have had the opportunity to have many discussions with Agent Isai and work with him on several projects, such as the Fundraiser. Agent Isai has always invested time in what he does and has always considered community impact and sought the community's opinion since that's his main job as CES. During a time when we don't have many Stewards, I'm sure Agent has the right judgment and principles to be Steward. --Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 05:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  The request and Reception123 covered my support pretty well. Zero issues from me. Universal Omega (talk) 05:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  While I am not as familiar with  as Reception, in the time spent with them I’ve also found them to be pleasant and courteous to others. They’ve shown great competency and skill, and I believe they’ll be a great asset to Miraheze as a steward. Happy to support this nomination, can’t wait to see how it unfolds. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 06:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 4)  I welcome your candidacy, and it is a great pleasure for the miraheze community to have even one more steward, and it will be very beneficial for miraheze to have a wonderful person like Agent Isai as a steward! by Buel ·Talk·Wikimail 08:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  Very trusted user and SRE Volunteer, per above. AlPaD (talk) 09:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 6)  Oh, absolutely. Agent Isai has demonstrated that he is more than capable of handling many hats he currently has in his possession, and has demonstrated responsibility when using those said hats. Therefore, I can safely conclude that he is more than capable of handling the Steward flag/hat. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 09:58, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 7)  Agent Isai has shown themself to be very competent and I am confidant that they will prove to be an excellent Steward. Sario528 (talk) 10:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 8) trusted. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 13:09, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * : Also trusted. Cigaryno (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  trusted user. MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 13:52, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  No concerns here. — Chrs (talk) 15:07, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 3)  Trusted enough --   Joseph  TB  CT  CA   14:17, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) Could use some new stewards. LetraSeca (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 5)  Per above. --  Bukkit  [ cetacean needed ] 14:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) Maybe I'm biased since Agent is one of the first people I worked closely with when I was brand new. In my experience he is highly competent, technically savvy and performed outreach above and beyond since before joining SRE and beyond what you'd expect after, including helping many communities transition into Miraheze. He has a very strong background of working with Stewards and other volunteers - communication and cooperation would be no issue. Though he has few or recent advanced rights, his background is very strong; he likely could have done this a long time ago and been perfectly suitable. Paired with Reception I think a lot of the issues at a Steward level would be solved by proxy. --Raidarr (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 7) I have enough faith in Agent to approve of him becoming a steward. Marxo Grouch  (talk) 19:31, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * 8)  As indicated in my above support for Reception123 my statement about multiple hats stands here. I would point out also that it is a shame that Agent Isai has not been Global Sysop in the past which could have really helped the community to have a first impression of how they handle global tools. Even if this is the case I appreciated Agent Isai's nomination statement as well looking at their contributions which indicate to me that they have a good judgment and would be able to apply the discretion that is necessary for a Steward while also being kind and helpful. While still uncomfortable about the lack of experience with global tools which made me lean towards a weak oppose I have decided to weakly support this due to Agent Isai having activated on Miraheze for a very long time which indicates to me that he understands the project and global policies. --DeeM28 (talk) 12:40, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 9)  I am satisfied for the responses provided and I trust this user to take the steward's tools. HeartsDo (Talk / Global / Wiki Creator) 17:49, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 10) . --Startus (talk) 18:17, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 11)  The responses given and his contributions make me more than comfortable to support. Cheers, Matttest (talk | contribs) 11:25, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1)  It can sometimes be difficult for me to contact him, although these could just be isolated experiences on my end. Bawitdaba (talk) 17:13, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You can always email him, which is something I sometimes do. You can always join IRC (seeing as you deleted your Discord account a month ago) so you can always get into contact with him. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don’t know if this is true for everyone but I have no issues getting in contact with him. He’s active on the Miraheze IRC/Discord channels and generally responds fast. I also can reach him via DM on IRC if needed. Thanks - BrandonWM (talk • contribs • global • rights) 13:27, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Too early!
 * Can you state the reason why you oppose this request? Thanks. Cheers, Matttest (talk | contribs) 12:30, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, I would like to clarify that my account is 6 years old and I began fully volunteering here over a year ago. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 14:57, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I say “oppose” since in most cases user need to become a Global Sysop before they become a Steward (except founders, and stewards promote by invitation [but not by nomination, such as NDK]); I also advise in the future all global user rights except GIPBE are selected, invited and nominated by current stewards and it won't a position anyone can request especially Global Sysops since other wiki hosters enforce such.
 * Autocratic community positions (appointments from 'the management') are not in the spirit of the platform. In this respect Miraheze is not like other wiki hosters, it is operated by the community for the wider community. If it is an endorsement issue then (as I'm about to vote) you will see my explicit support as a current Steward. In terms of experience Agent has collaborated heavily with current and former Stewards and is otherwise involved with Miraheze internals at a technical level, which in some ways is deeper than even a Steward's reach Technical (SRE) is one of the few areas we have which is more traditionally 'staff' and require explicit in-crowd trust to get into, which Agent has. --Raidarr (talk) 17:36, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, please explain why (I want details and I don't understand the information above, please!): (1) Most of global right are requestable, unlike Fandom's "Most of global user rights are selected and invited by Fandom Staff. It is not a position you can request. It serves no purpose asking staff or other global maintainers to be given the rights, as such requests will be ignored. " or Shoutwiki's staffs are "experienced wiki editors" that was invited by staffs, (2) Stewards aren't non-requestable or from the UK Worksop Company, but from community nomination? (I asked this since Huijiwiki's stewards are from the China Beijing Company and it is not open for request for it. )
 * You'll have to point out what you don't understand, since my support vote covers things quite clearly. There aren't many ways to say that Agent is deeply involved, that he's collaborated with core volunteers in tech and the Steward team, and has an immense amount of platform and technical experience. The misunderstanding seems to come down to how Miraheze works, which is a problem. Miraheze was founded for greater community accountability and early exceptions had to do with a total lack of community to vote, which is not the case now. Like Wikimedia, Miraheze elects its community managers. The exceptions are SRE, the technical team behind the platform (which Agent is very highly trusted by), the board of directors (which can be partially elected) and Trust and Safety (more obscure by design anyway). That's just how our system works and if you want community positions to be strictly appointed and disagree with the nomination system, that is a topic for another place. --Raidarr (talk) 11:30, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hmm...... I temporarily put aside the proposal of "opposing the nomination system", but I still oppose.

Comments

 * 1)  Just 1 more day left until the succession of 2 additional Stewards come into play, and I am quite excited to hear the news.  was our latest recruited steward, and I must say that he's doing great, despite admittedly saying that abuse filters aren't his specialty, and I do not blame him at all. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 11:27, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * To be fair, Regex is a skill not many users have given its difficulty. -- Bukkit  [ cetacean needed ] 16:54, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * That’s why we need both “community” volunteers and “technical” users from the SRE team. Consider this as another main reason that I supported this request, because I believe more stewards who volunteered in a different position can give better judgement. Cheers, Matttest (talk | contribs) 13:29, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

John's Revocation of Stewardship

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * User resigned all rights, including Steward. OrangeStar (talk) 13:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

User: User:John ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
I have resigned from Miraheze due to recent actions and comments from John and the breach of trust that has effectively ruined the organization. Whether this pass or fail I really don't care anymore. John has betrayed my trust and the trust of other volunteers, and so I request the community revoke Stewardship from John as well. Universal Omega (talk) 08:16, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) He has disregarded the trust of the volunteers that could result in total collapse of Miraheze. Only if he is gone will I consider returning eventually. Universal Omega (talk) 08:19, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait, so I exposed harassment in a private channel of our users and community and I'm the problem? This sounds like an attempt to silence a whistleblower so mistreatment of the community can effectively continue unchallenged. John (talk) 08:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) You 'inadvertently' created a hostile non-work environment, John.  I respect the miraheze project but I'm out too and will be filing my own resignation shortly.  --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 09:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Yurr! Uncool, dude. Handle it in private, no need to "expose" out of context messages that are jokes. If every joke was deemed of this nature was deemed harassment, the fun police would've taken me away years ago. Also, where is the mistreatment? I see that everything said was in private. Where's the direct mistreatment? Carhles (talk) 09:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) I understood situation.John is one of leader of miraheze.Isn't it?I still don't know why John did like that. by Buehl106·Talk·e-mail 10:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Without a doubt in my mind. Leaking private messages is almost unambiguously unacceptable. --Blad  (talk • contribs • global) 11:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) I'm putting this as weak support because this was a situation that needed addressing, but whistleblowing wasn't the solution, addressing the grievances (probably with a mediator, given what I know of the situation) was. I'm also not seeing other attempts to address this situation before deploying the nuclear option in the name of transparency, which is not a good way to resolve the issue, either, but I'd like to be corrected if there were previous attempts. --NeoQwerty (talk) 13:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1)  I commented this over at #miraheze on IRC, but I also wanted to comment here as well. I believe that it was all a big misunderstanding of sorts. I personally believe those comments were just venting frustration, but, due to how text-only conversations work, which is that there's no context, I can just as easily see why those comments would be taken as the start of a targeted harassment campaign. As for what I mean with that there's no context: In face-to-face conversations, it is relatively easy to know when someone is just venting frustrations, via body language, tone, things like that, but such a thing doesn't exist in text-only chat, making it easy to misunderstand things. Personally, if John really thought that was an attempt at a harassment campaign, they should have started by, on said private IM channel, going straight to the point and asking directly to whoever was in that channel what they meant by these comments. Going straight to leaking is not necessarily the best option here (see above). I also understand Universal Omega and Reception123 feeling offended by the leak of those messages. The fact that whoever posted those messages felt it was okay to post it there is indicative to the trust they had with fellow SRE members, which obviously doesn't exist anymore (To whoever's reading this, I'm sure you have at least one vented about things with a friend IRL. I'm sure that you felt it was okay to do that because you trusted to the other person to not go around telling everyone your frustrations. I think a similar thing happened here). All in all, I'm going to assume good faith in that John just misunderstood things. OrangeStar (talk) 12:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Appreciate your balanced view. But your "venting to friend about work" comparison is not the same thing, in my view. When you vent to a friend about work, you are venting to someone that is disconnected from the decisionmaking hierarchy. It's effectively isolated from consequences. But in this case, it was venting to the inner group of a larger organization where everyone has stake in the game, about someone who is lower in that hierarchy. I definitely agree with the general premise of assuming good faith ("harassment campaign" is very strong wording), but this remains at least a little worrying for me, as someone who has in other communities seen warning signs for this kind of thing and was the one to tell people off for talking behind people's backs too much (not by whistleblowing, though.) --ℓordpipe (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Disclaimer: I have little involvement with the broader Miraheze interwiki community, but I spent some time familiarizing myself with the discussions to try to post a thoughtful comment. Here is what I read: this, this, this, this, and the IRC logs  The rude comments need to be accounted for. I have plenty of experience in internet community moderation to know that you cannot let grudges against users be sustained in private bubbles. Even if User:Naleksuh annoyed the crap out of you (I read through the IRC logs of the past few months and yes, multiple things about their behavior would annoy the crap out of me) it is a much worse organizational problem for that to boil up privately instead of being addressed with an entire team.  Only weak oppose, because the comments are not particularly severe and don't deserve the shouting match that happened in the noticeboard. I also have a bit of an inclination to trust the judgement of the multiple SREs that spoke out against leaking those comments. If it caused that much of a stir then it could be something deeper and you should be reading the Support section above to find out what some of the people who are unmistakably pillars of the community have to say. --ℓordpipe (talk) 10:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) While I understand that leaking private messages is not necessarily the solution to a problem or even helpful to prevent drama (as this whole revocation shows clearly), and that John could've certainly handled the issue better by not posting such messages publicly and probably resolving the issue directly with the IRC group involved in private, I feel like this is unfair to John by asking for his revocation over one incident. If there were a pattern of incidents like this, it would be understandable, but this is only one isolated incident; people make mistakes. Tali64³ (talk) 11:07, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Comments

 * 1) Could we get a clearminded on-wiki summary of what he's done to blow up some of the key contributors on the platform? What I'm gathering is that sensitive private discussion was leaked?  This all seems incredibly quick in not even a clear 6 hours from when I went to bed last night. --Raidarr (talk) 08:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Me too. I am very confused. Bbbtest (talk | contribs | e-mail) 11:07, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * After reading the RC feed, John posted private messages from some unknown SRE-only IM group on the questions section of Reception123's request for IRC GC. Some SRE members very much didn't like that, with at least Universal Omega (SRE member and nominated director for the technical team) leaving and Reception123 (MediaWiki engineering manager) at least announcing their intention to leave. Both were vital members of SRE, both from their position in the "hierarchy" and the fact that they did a lot of the day-to-day work at phab, so this is kind of a big deal. OrangeStar (talk) 11:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * In fact, barring nothing short of a miracle, I don't think there's going to be a Miraheze after this. OrangeStar (talk) 11:44, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * From my understanding, John posted private messages publicly to try to resolve an issue in an IRC channel, causing events that led to several resignations and this request for revocation. Tali64³ (talk) 11:27, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) This is not the time to be having a discussion about this.  The messages, now they have been leaked, should be discussed in good faith and with cool heads.  The outcome of that discussion must surely inform any discussion about John's stewardship.  As it is, John asked "Do these comments represent value and Miraheze in a good way?" and that question has yet to be addressed.  Until it is, it makes no sense to already be debating the choice to leak them. Mickulty (talk) 09:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) This whole situation just makes me sad. The co-founder of a project should understand, more than anyone else, that leaking private messages is the worst thing you could do. People say bad things in private due to frustration, we can't expect volunteers to be on professional behavior all the time when they are not professionals (even though they do have professional-level pressures). John, if you thought these comments were a problem, leaking them was not the way to resolve them. The only reason I'm not voting in favor of removing John's steward permissions (as well as any other involvement with Miraheze he can be removed from) is that this is still very recent and it's not clear what has happened exactly. But leaking messages, no matter the reason or intent, was way out of line. --Ondo (talk) 09:59, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Reception123's Revocation of Stewardship

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * Issue involves several people, not just Reception123. In particular, the recent messages were written by Zppix (who is not an IRC op and also has previously lost permissions via an RfDX). I will start a discussion regarding the incident in a wider scope, such as at community noticeboard. Naleksuh (talk)

User: Reception123 ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
If we are going to RfDS people betraying trust, let's start with the people betraying trust, rather than trying to remove people revealing these issues just to pile on into an even bigger cabal.

On March 16th, I sent an email to John reading this: Hello John,

There is currently an issue on IRC and moreover Miraheze as a whole that I am hoping you can look at and possibly solve.

[personal issue of mine not related to Miraheze redacted]

Onto Miraheze.

There has been a consistent issue over the past few months of "pile-on" attacks, targetted use of resources and general incivility. You might recognize this because it has been a continued issue. Previously, one specific person had blamed the failure of wiki creations onto me specifically, and had cited a specific instruction not to create wikis that had not actually happened. This was concerning because the CreateWiki software had malfunctioned but instead it was being used as an opportunity to blame me.

Prior to that, a good example of this was an RFC that was about how to archive threads on my talk page. Not how to archive threads on talk pages in general, the entire RFC was specifically about *my* talk page. You may remember this because you closed it and noted in that close that it bordered on harassment.

Sadly, these issues do not seem to have gone away, and have only gotten worse. Last night, a user reverted a close of an RFC on test.miraheze.org stating that only functionaries can close RfCs. I pointed out on-wiki that any uninvolved user may close them. This person then discussed this on IRC which I noticed and responded to, which also contained the definition of a functionary. One specific user-- a currently sitting global sysop-- claimed that this discussion was me randomly starting a discussion on who does and does not constitute a functionary, when this was not the case at all, and also referred to me as "the most willfully ornery user on the platform".

The VCP, applying to all Miraheze volunteers, especially including global sysops, reads "Our volunteers are held to higher standards of conduct. Thus, we never let escalate disagreement or frustration into personal attacks or harassment. We, of all people, work together to resolve conflicts, assume good faith, and do our best to act in an empathic fashion - we set the example of how to do this.". It is never a good show for global sysops to be openly name-calling others, especially stating that they are the most willfully ornery user on the platform. It does not feel good to have a world record for being a terrible person, at least according to them.

I posted on their talk page regarding the issue, expecting either some sort of clarification or apology. Instead, they decided to once again do this, publicly writing it once again on-wiki. Several other users also commented, completely ignoring the issues with personal attacks and instead focusing on inventions. This was a very hurtful experience and felt like the closure of an escape to Miraheze--because specific people can be authorized to act however they want without consequence, while others will have a tag-team watching them looking for anything that can be used against them--or even *invented*. This continues to be similar to the previous problem with a pile-on regarding the actiosn of one specific user.

The next morning I received a message that I had been banned from #miraheze, stating "We must treat all users fairly, and cannot show favoritism". I waited for a similar message to be added to the talk page of the other users involved, but it never was. It is very curious that a message that states that we cannot show favoritism proceeding to show favoritism by selectively allowing VCP violations and name-calling by anyone generally liked and choosing to only look for information on common targets; create problems that arguably were not present; and only use actions from those on the "social blacklist".

I have also been informed of a "zero-tolerance policy" that will only apply to me and no-one else, creating an environment in which anyone can say anything they want and I will not be able to respond. This continues to contribute to the atmosphere of being worried about being targetted by others either simply for being in unpopular minority viewpoints; or for fun in general. This was the same issue that led users to violate both the user talk policy and the edit-warring policy on my talk page, repeatedly reinstating messages that were removed, place a false block later unanimously disagreed with by all stewards, and start an RFC specifically about my talk page and only mine.

Regretfully, while I have ignored the issues the message last night and action this morning are becoming increasingly impossible. In a situation in which someone spends time volunteering assets only for this to intentionally be made as difficult as possible; unfortunately, I am not sure that I will be able to continue contributing to Miraheze if this remains a problem. As the arbiter of the previous time that this was a problem, and the only current group contact, I ask you to look into this situation and CosmicAlpha's actions (both the ban placed at 12:06 and the lack of action (either bans or even a message) against global sysops attacking others over IRC). While the ban is set to expire in a month, given that this nearly year-old issue is still a problem, combined with [redacted per above], this issue if continued is going to prevent me from being able to continue contributing to Miraheze if it continues.

Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to ask.

-- Naleksuh

The next morning, I woke up to find that John had investigated this issue and indeed found evidence of harassment, and not just the already obvious public harassment, even worse stuff in private, including these:

just run DROP NALE FROM *;

I’d gladly risk my rights to block him on ever wiki I have advanced rights on

He can’t appeal IRC bans if we globally ban him

I’d vote a policy that says the cabal can revoke any right, anytime we want 😂

Thats when we OS it and it never happened

Fwiw theres not a snowballs chance in hell any of us would support it

Now, the old-boys club has a tendency to selectively ignore any policy issues from people on the "whitelist", and freak out about anything from people on the "blacklist".

So, what was the reaction to learning about this issue? It was to vote against the op and ban, and sanction people both for continued attacks and acting even worse when they think they will not be seen? No, it was to RfDS the person who brought these attacks to light. Obviously.

What's worse, it was not just to RfDS them, but to do that and then take no action against the person actually doing it. Multiple people have resigned due to having lost the ability to freely harass others. So, let's start the discussion about what actually happens to the people doing the harassment? Naleksuh (talk) 17:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Not only has Reception123 been very helpful around Miraheze, they have no apparent connection to the posting of such messages; Zppix was actually the poster of those messages by his own admission. Tali64³ (talk) 17:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you link to where Zppix said that? (That's not a challenge, if you have it I would like to see it). My understanding was that they weren't all from a single person and were from several people, and they were posted in Reception123's section. Naleksuh (talk) 17:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Special:Diff/324686 Agent Isai  Talk to me! 17:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Reception is a very trustworthy person, and a vital resource for Miraheze, the comments that John leaked, were not made by anyone but myself. The decision to ban you from IRC and subject you to a Zero Tolerance Policy was a decision made by IRC Operators, not one person. This is a very misguided overreaction. I think the best thing to do right now, is give a few days to let us figure out how to deal with the recent events, and not jump to revoking everyone’s rights. John willingly resigned, nothing can change that, but let’s not dismantle the entire community just based on emotions. Zppix (Meta &#124; talk to me) 17:27, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * the comments that John leaked, were not made by anyone but myself. Why were you even present during a discussion between #miraheze ops? You are not one. This continues to have the problem of the "private clique". Also if I remember correctly you lost global sysop permissions via an RfDGS so what private channels *do* you need?
 * This is a very misguided overreaction. So was RfDSing John.
 * let’s not dismantle the entire community just based on emotions It's a bit late for that. This request was filing a counter-proposal based on the idea of people flaming John for bringing up the issue if targetted harassment, but with nothing for the actual harassment itself. If you would like a seperate discussion about the issue that is not an RfDS, that would make sense and infact I may open one myself, but I don't see an excuse to only RfDS John, but only John. The reason why, is because John was the one stopping people from harassing me. Naleksuh (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Zppix posted those messages. If you want to start this at least choose the right target, then we'll consider what you have to say. OrangeStar (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Reception123 didn't write those messages, as OrangeStar said. Try to pay a bit more attention from now on before slandering volunteers. Collei (talk) 17:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you highlight where in this request I said that Reception123 wrote them? Nowhere. I was considering withdrawing the request but I certainly will not now that you claim I am "not paying attention' and "slandering volunteers" Naleksuh (talk) 17:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I generally assumed that the evidence quoted in a demotion proceeding is related to the person you are proposing to be demoted. Collei (talk) 17:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * No I'm documenting the issue as a whole. But if nobody will read it then nothing I can do to stop it. Naleksuh (talk) 17:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Raidarr's Request for Stewardship
User: Raidarr ( contributions &bull; CA &bull; blocks log &bull; rights log &bull; global rights log )

Reasoning for request
I am interested in a second Steward term. The circumstances are different, both for myself and the platform. For myself, the burnout that lead to my original resignation is simply not as likely given the backup of the current Steward crew, and the life circumstances I expected to claim me much longer are no longer in play. I can be around regularly for the foreseeable future, and I can operate more efficiently now than I was able to in my prior Stewardship. I've been thinking what my future in this platform could be, and I think this would be a place to start. It would be alongside attempts to develop the structure of the platform for the better, and the initiatives started by current Stewards to get more participation and awareness on Meta by wikis we host.

For the platform, the need for a reinforcing Steward is not as urgent as before. However, I believe my experience as a former Steward in good standing, background in dealing with communities on the platform (both previously and continued now as Global Sysop) and non-involvement with SRE would allow me to 'take the edge off' in the current team. Current Stewards are all also members of SRE which has been in a difficult spot lately. I will do what I can even if this does not succeed, but I believe these rights would make me more effective and help global functions run more smoothly. Specifically, addressing routine requests (on the SN and on dedicated pages/other venues like email), more effectively supporting CVT (a majority of the work, investigating sockpuppetry, is in the hands of Stewards exclusively) and investigating/handling Content Policy issues, all of which I believe I've proven myself capable in doing. Where I'm not confident handling an issue myself, I intend to solicit the advice of my colleagues or as needed bring the matter to community input.

I defer to the community from here, and am available for any questions and inquiries. --Raidarr (talk) 18:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Additional comments given by user (if any)

 * See Archive 3 on this page, second entry for the previous request if you're interested.
 * NDA, 2FA all in order.

Questions for candidate
--NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 19:40, 3 April 2023 (UTC) (On a personal note, glad to see you stepping up again following your return.)
 * 1) What steps do you plan to take (or what actions will you avoid) to limit your risk of a return to burnout during this term as Steward, if approved?
 * 2) What areas do you see as underserved in the current Steward remit, and how do you plan to contribute in those areas?
 * 3) How do you view impartiality and need for recusal when it comes to matters for steward review? Who is empowered to ask for recusal and when?
 * One factor to burnout last time was wanting to be or do a little too much at one time, which didn't mix well with being the only day-to-day steward for an extended period. It contributed to a loss of energy that persisted even after being reinforced by Agent and Reception. Aside from avoiding that, working within my means and striving for a workload balance between stewards, I can't say I have a lot of ideas. But those if followed properly should do the trick. I'm open to finding other ways because burnout is a real concern for me, even if it's better than it used to be.
 * Volunteer documentation, cohesion and structure is very informal and suffers from being quite compartmentalized or undeveloped. I'd like to see more interplay between Stewards and other roles like T&S and SRE especially in responding to emergencies, such as (but hopefully, never again) the db141 issue. I like to keep tabs on access control and procedural consistency. These priorities along with 'detail work' are my niche, which I don't think most people quite see the same way including the current team. Detail work includes frequent triage of the SN, checking out areas outside the SN as often as they come to mind, and trying to minimize cases that drag on because they're complicated, or there's a point but they just aren't priority to deal with, or it's a request that's just plain involved and takes a bit more time.
 * With impartiality, I play by ear; if for example I'm significantly involved a discussion (aside from just providing an input pointing out related facts or policy), then it would be inappropriate for me to be its assessor especially if I've staked a strong opinion. In matters of conduct I should never be a prosecutor and a judge. Overall I would want to consider the image of my involvement. The Caesar's Wife principle applies; I am a user on Miraheze and I am entitled to post my 2c, but it should not compromise the integrity of the Steward office that is trusted to provide 'objective' assessments. For recusal: anyone would be at liberty to ask another Steward to preside as general practice. The only time I'd dig in is an extreme case of wp:DUCK ie, clear-cut LTA trying to bend the system.
 * I hope this is of use, feel free to drop further questions if the above is incomplete or you'd like me to expand on something. --Raidarr (talk) 23:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users
Adding direct link to archived original request for interested parties. --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 18:32, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) I've only had good interactions with Raidarr and I don't doubt that him being on the team will be a solid net positive. He has ample experience with global tools and is a friendly face on our Discord along with being very knowledgeable. I liked his outreach efforts in the past and I strongly support his new outreach effort to get more wiki administrators in the know of global things such as how our global rights holders work, what Meta is for, etc. With the loss of John on the team, another Steward wouldn't hurt and I'm very pleased to see that Raidarr has stepped up to the batting plate to help out the project more. Active users in Steward positions is something very much needed and with Raidarr on the team, we will have a very active Steward team which is a big net positive on the entire project.  Agent Isai  Talk to me! 18:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Raidarr is a kind and helpful user, not to mention his current work as a Global Sysop. Tali64³ (talk) 18:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Per above, welcome back! AlPaD (talk) 19:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Answers given to questions were well-reasoned, and their departure from stewardship took place in good standing.  Given their track record during rockier periods of Miraheze history, I have full confidence that they will act as a solid addition to our steward ranks if re-elected as such by the community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotAracham (User talk:NotAracham • Special:Contributions/NotAracham) 23:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) I have known Raidarr for years, and have only experienced the best in my interactions with him. He is kind and courteous most of the time, but is not above being blunt and direct when necessary, something that is always needed in a functionary. He is well-versed in Miraheze policies, having served previously as a Steward. Another Steward would definitely be useful for CVT matters, especially one that doesn't have an SRE or Board hat to attend to in addition to Steward. More users as Steward never hurts as there is a backlog generally for wiki reopening and global lock requests. He is also regularly involved in wiki outreach. Strongest support from me. BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 02:09, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 6) Raidarr showed us his best acitivity as steward.Recently John resigned from CVT.I welcome this request. by Buehl106·Talk·e-mail 04:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 7) apologies if my wording will sound off, but Raidarr is one of the most thoughtful volunteers on Miraheze who gives very reasonable analysis/comments on many different occasions, be it simple support thing for newcomers or more complicated community stuff, and on top of that is very cool to interact w/, so by all means I support his candidature and welcome him back. KatozzKita (talk) 04:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 8)           I'm a firm believer in experience.  Esp from someone such as Raidarr who knew how to leave properly when it was time.  I don't think I have ever been good at knowing when to exit so I have left a bunch of wreckage by disappearing.  More so, I trust the senior officers here, that Raidarr is a good fit for the team.  I know that there are some objections about statements / comments that Raidarr may have made (and I wasn't there for those moments).           I personally prefer constructive criticism over silence so much that I regard an awkwardly uttered statement better than no statement at all.  I may react poorly but that's how it goes.  If someone wants me to keep an open mind, then I would hope that they keep an open mind whenever I stick my foot in my mouth.  So thats why I support Raidarr with all my heart.  To any opposers, know that I have considered all comments to the best of my ability. --Imamy (talk) 05:58, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 9)  Raidarr has been Steward in the past and his resignation was voluntary. If he was capable of assuming the role in the past and as far as I am aware there were not any serious complaints during his last tenure I do not see any reason why he should not be given the opportunity again. I am unconvinced by the opposing comment which attempts to take things said out of context and whose author refuses to look into their own conduct and behavior which is itself not in conformity with the VCP that is cited. --DeeM28 (talk) 07:16, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see why it's the responsibility of the recipient of attacks to look into how they might "deserve" it. Regardless, even if the author is "itself not in confirmity with the VCP", it sounds like you are trying to use that to justify Raidarr's behavior. The oppose is based on Raidarr's problematic behavior, which you have not addressed. Naleksuh (talk) 07:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not my intention to use that as "justification". The point that I was attempting to get across is that the accusations were made in a way which implies that the comments were made out of spite and were not justified. While not wanting to get into the particular issue in this venue I do not accept the characterization that using an adjective to describe someone is to be considered "name calling". As for the personal grudges comment I am unable to find that particular incident. --DeeM28 (talk) 09:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) - I appreciate Raidarr's thoughtfulness in approach, which it seems would serve well the role of Steward. Having been a Steward previously, and on good terms, shows he has the necessary experience. He's more than qualified, and puts a good foot forward in doing so. No reason to object here, can only recommend from my observations of him. |  -- FrozenPlum   10:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) Of course not, especially not now. Raidarr still has not addressed the issue of VCP violations, name calling other users, doubling down on name calling and doing so again on-wiki, and the justification of using advanced permissions for personal grudges which is still an open T&S case, which I will need to ask updates on soon. Though I do think it takes a lot of confidence to request stewardship while actively the subject of a T&S case. Expect a request for removal of permissions soon. Naleksuh (talk) 23:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see why he should respond to the entire thread and should respond for the errors of others. Your thread frames everything as being connected and coordinated by some sort of group. That's far from the case and any individual skirmishes anyone has had with you (it seems almost all active Meta users have had a disagreement with you at some point) are not endorsed or planned out by anyone. He responded to your talk page message so you cannot claim he didn't address it, you haven't replied to his reply. As far as I know, Raidarr isn't subject to any T&S investigation and if he is, I'm sure he would've disclosed this already. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 23:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * No, repeating the VCP violation for a second time is not addressing it. I did not respond to Raidarr's message because it was disrespectful and doubled down on the issues that the original message was about, making further discussion pointless. Nor did anyone have any time to process that before the next targetted harassment issue happened just hours later. It does however make this RfS innapropriate but instead cause people to question why they are still a global sysop while personally attacking users. Naleksuh (talk) 23:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Raidarr said you were ornery—a person who is combative. I don't think many will disagree. I would suggest you hold a discussion on whether these comments are unwarranted to not. I fear it'll snowball against you. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 00:01, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * No, they did not just state that I was ornery and nothing else- they stated that I was "the most willfully ornery user on the platform"- basically stating that I held a world record for being a bad person. It concerns me that you've left this part out, possibly to portray Raidarr as good and me bad. And intentionally using thinly veiled threats of bad things to psyche me into not starting a discussion. In other words, I should not speak out about the way I feel I have been mistreated and should simply "take" these attacks instead. Meanwhile, this does not apply the other way around. Naleksuh (talk) 00:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Very interesting use of semantics here! I'm not trying to influence or dissuade you to not start a request (or else I wouldn't have mentioned it), I'm just saying that I strongly believe it won't succeed and on top of that, I know that whatever I say won't affect you in your decision making process, you won't take it into account. Now, the central part of Raidarr's statement was calling you ornery, that word is what sets the tone of the quote. Whether you're the most or not is just extra stuff that's whatever. He could've left out the most part and just said "you're a willfully ornery user" and I'm sure you would've claimed "he basically stated that I'm a bad person", whether you have a record or not is extra so no, I wasn't trying to portray Raidarr as someone good or better than you think they are, I'm just focusing on the central part of his statement. Agent Isai  Talk to me! 00:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see Raidarr justifying 'use of advanced permissions for personal grudges' anywhere in the linked thread. Could you please clarify (or update) where this occurred or strike this element of opposition?  Thanks. --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 00:08, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Disregard, issue was with my misread of wording on the sentence that mixes lack of response on comment threads with behavioral accusations. Retracted. --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 00:15, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Feel free to make the case for removal at your convenience. I have little to add except that perhaps I could have worded my response to you with more gloss, and that your behavior has been left unaddressed for an incredibly long time for which I apologize to the wider community. Though, given most people who interact with you become involved parties, it is difficult to imagine a lot of people who could deal with it in an uninvolved way. To contextualize my comment and address yet another attempt to put words in people's mouths, I do not imply you hold a world record for being a bad person as that line is incredibly long. You simply hold the record for consistently causing the most drama on Miraheze without having been held accountable for doing so. Anyone interested in this bit of drama may read the last discussion on my talk page. I stand by my words and voters should absolutely take them into consideration and decide for themselves. I do not take your T&S case seriously. "Using advanced permissions for personal grudges" is a hyperbolic and obviously untrue claim. --Raidarr (talk) 00:38, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1)  per above.