What are your criterias for determining consensus, simple majority?

Pedroleodato wrote:

(In reply to comment #1)

What are your criterias for determining consensus, simple majority?

Max, this page (https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Vota%C3%A7%C3%B5es/Reversores_bloqueando_v%C3%A2ndalos) shows a poll of the community. In polls of this type, usually is simple majority. Sorry for bad English.

chicovenancio.justforbugzilla wrote:

Yep Max, we are crazy like that in ptwiki. We had a vote and this decision won by a simple majority. So we should have a three month test with rollbackers having permission to block (Ips and non auto-confirmed users in obvious cases for at most 24 hours). Tough I do not agree, this is the decision of the community, as soon as you can change this setting the better.

On fr.wikipedia, the % of support of a decision is whether set in policy (formally, like for ArbCom elections or as an indicative threshold, like for RfA), whether announced (and this is always the case for the polls and the "prises de décisions", the RfC for policies) before the advice collecting process. In this last case, we use a Condorcet or a threshold varying widely between 50 and 80% (usually "simple majority", "2/3", 75% or 80%).

As this is a test run, it seems reasonable to allow a decision at simple majority.

And a community consensus seems to exist on the validity of this voting process and method.

It is rather worrying when a wiki drops down to 35 sysops per 3.5k active users and seeks to split the sysop rights in various chunks in a manner akin to hiwiki instead of electing new sysops.

Sorry, 35 sysops per 5.4k active users is what I meant.

pt.wikip knew a difficult period with the retroactive sysop rights withdrawal / Ruy Pugliesi affair, leading to a lost of 50+ sysops, a lost of CU, a lost of ArbCom.

The rollback right is a good complement to sysop right, and not always in the intent to split the sysops flags package.

Commons. and en. have active admins AND active rollbackers.

Furthermore, the pt.wikip situation implies sysop isn't a right wanted by experimented contributors(cf. this Darkoneko's post, http://darkoneko.wordpress.com/2011/02/16/ptwiki-est-a-poil-2/), so their rollbackers solution is legitimate.

And, of course, the pt. situation couldn't be compared to hi., as their community is more active.

Pedroleodato wrote:

(In reply to comment #0)

https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Vota%C3%A7%C3%B5es/Reversores_bloqueando_v%C3%A2ndalos

Please, add in rollback:

$wgGroupPermissions['rollback']['block'] = true;

This permission should be for three months, according to poll. Sorry for bad
English.

Sorry, the correct is:

$wgGroupPermissions['rollbacker']['block'] = true;

chicovenancio.justforbugzilla wrote:

Any news? Is there a technical problem to implement this? Another kind of problem?

cacio_lol wrote:

Hello, the application has been open for more than 20 days, there is a problem? we need the tool in pt.wiki.

(In reply to comment #10)

Hello, the application has been open for more than 20 days, there is a problem?
we need the tool in pt.wiki.

adding Sam since he is the one who does this.

Done