User:Angusmclellan/RfA review

Welcome to the Question phase of RfA Review. We hope you'll take the time to respond to your questions in order to give us further understanding of what you think of the RfA process. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers here. Also, feel free to answer as many questions as you like. Don't feel you have to tackle everything if you don't want to.

In a departure from the normal support and oppose responses, this review will focus on your thoughts, opinions and concerns. Where possible, you are encouraged to provide examples, references, diffs and so on in order to support your viewpoint. Please note that at this point we are not asking you to recommend possible remedies or solutions for any problems you describe, as that will come later in the review.

If you prefer, you can submit your responses anonymously by emailing them to gazimoff (at) o2.co.uk. Anonymous responses will be posted as subpages and linked to from the responses section, but will have the contributor's details removed. If you have any questions, please use the talk page.

Once you've provided your responses, please encourage other editors to take part in the review. More responses will improve the quality of research, as well as increasing the likelihood of producing meaningful results.

Once again, thank you for taking part!

Questions

When thinking about the adminship process, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:

1. Candidate selection (inviting someone to stand as a candidate)

   Have suggested to two editors that they should stand. Both did, but regrettably only one succeeded.

2. Administrator coaching (either formally or informally)

   Threat or menace? Could encourage mandarinism and a closed admin caste. If being an admin is so complex that people need to be trained, the process is stuffed. If RfA is so complex that people need to be trained, the process is stuffed. And so on. Not in favour. RfA isn't that complex, adminship may be. If it is, coaching is fixing the wrong problem.

3. Nomination, co-nomination and self-nomination (introducing the candidate)

   Never done this myself. No opinion.

4. Advertising and canvassing

   Against.

5. Debate (Presenting questions to the candidate)

   In favour of frank debate. Against stupid me-too questions. And RfA is not a civility-free zone. Really.

6. Election (including providing reasons for support/oppose)

   I am in favour of an "election"-style process. I prefer that reasons are given, but I do not see it as essential.

7. Withdrawal (the candidate withdrawing from the process)

   Continuing an RfA against the candidate's wishes would be quite unacceptable.

8. Declaration (the bureaucrat closing the application. Also includes WP:NOTNOW closes)

   No problems with the current process.

9. Training (use of New Admin School, other post-election training)

   See my comments on admin coaching.

10. Recall (the Administrators Open to Recall process)

    If that's what they want. Should not be compulsory. Not signed up myself. Will not sign up.

When thinking about adminship in general, what are your thoughts and opinions about the following areas:

1. How do you view the role of an administrator?

   Janitorial gnoming. Dull. No, make that very dull.

2. What attributes do you feel an administrator should possess?

   Above all else, a high tolerance for stupidity and boredom. An understanding of our objectives and values. No expectation that admins or candidates should understand all policies, especially trivial ones like the workings of WP:AIV or WP:UAA. Clue is what matters.

Finally, when thinking about Requests for Adminship:

1. Have you ever voted in a request for Adminship? If so what was your experience?

   Yes. Commenting in an RfA is painless.

2. Have you ever stood as a candidate under the Request for Adminship process? If so what was your experience?

   Yes. Remarkably stress-free.

3. Do you have any further thoughts or opinions on the Request for Adminship process?

   Could be worse. Most of the suggested alternatives have been. I do not believe the current process is sufficiently flawed to justify the lamentation it provokes.

Once you're finished...

Thank you again for taking part in this review of the Request for Adminship process. Now that you've completed the questionnaire, don't forget to add the following line of code to the bottom of the Response page by clicking this link and copying the following to the BOTTOM of the list.

* [[User:Angusmclellan/RfA review]] added by ~~~ at ~~~~~

Again, on behalf of the project, thank you for your participation.

This question page was generated by {{RFAReview}} at 21:45 on 15 June 2008.