New book - 'Building a Better World in Your Backyard' - on Kickstarter (sponsored friend)
- This is a proposed Appropedia policy. You can , or discuss it on the talk page or at the Appropedia policy discussion page.
- For now, this should be considered an essay by one or more Appropedians, and not as a policy or guideline.
- In basic agreement with Appropedia's mission.
- Familiar with Appropedia policies and guidelines and consistently works within them.
- Respects science and the scientific method, but also understands that people following the scientific method can have genuine disagreement, due to our imperfect knowledge. Whether or not one is a scientist or engineer, it is essential to be aware of one's own limitations.
- Shows humility and respect, is on good terms with the Appropedia community at large, and is respectful and calm during conflict. (A lack of evidence that a person gets into conflict regularly is a good thing.)
Questions to resolve
How committed? At Wikipedia, adminship has come to involve a high level of commitment; at the same time there is Jimbo Wales' statement in February 2003 that "becoming a sysop is *not a big deal*."W
Someone with extensive experience on another project may have all the technical abilities and understanding of wikis that is needed, and may be completely trustworthy. However, to have some of the stronger powers, e.g. to delete articles and ban users, may need a deeper involvement with Appropedia, to have a knowledge of the people involved and the pages we have on the site.
- Grant "visiting adminships" to those who are mainly involved outside of Appropedia - recognizing the trustworthiness of the person and giving them the technical privileges, on the understanding that the actual banning of users and deleting of pages is not within their scope of tasks, other than blatant spam and vandalism.
- Giving limited powers, e.g. everything but banning and deleting - a kind of demi-admin role. Is this possible in MediaWiki? If so, we might be comfortable giving these positions out more freely.
As banning users in an emergency is one of the more important functions, the first option makes more sense.