On 10/21/2013 08:13 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > On a typical site, paid staff would deal with problematic users.
The obvious, and perhaps a bit trite, answer would be that we are most certainly not a typical site by any meaning of the term. :-) Seriously, however, I can understand why some current holders of rights might have reservations about a policy that tightens greatly how private information is handled and how much vetting is done on who does the handling; but that tightening does very much need to take place. It's not clear to me what those people who have signed the petition think they can accomplish; those new rules (perhaps altered through feedback) will need to be installed eventually, but nobody is obliged to abide them if they do not feel comfortable doing so; being a steward, oversighter or checkuser is not something one is forced into doing. If they prefer not to proceed with the new system, they don't actually need to resign. As a volunteer, I'd *much* rather those functions be held by active members of the community than by staff; and as long as there remains sufficient volunteers to do the job, then this is what should happen. (We'd probably get more people willing to step forward if we stopped - collectively - heaping so much crap on the heads of functionaries; but that's a different issue). -- Coren / Marc _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>