User:Ev/Accountability

I am an administrator open to recall because I believe that there should be a simple process of de-adminship as an expedite alternative to the tortuous and time-consuming dispute resolution ones.

Most problems can be easily solved by dialogue:

If you consider that my actions as an administrator are detrimental to the English Wikipedia, please think about discussing your concerns with me before requesting my de-adminship, as those concerns may well be the product of a simple misunderstanding or just an isolated, unfortunate mistake I may have done.

As I mentioned in my request for adminship, "I do commit mistakes, quite often, and I'm willing to recognize them, and correct them. I'm deeply aware that I could always be wrong: I'm always open to be persuaded by reasonable arguments." I'm always willing to discuss any complaints.

Criteria

If you have come here to request that I stand for a re-confirmation of my adminship, please note that, at my discretion^[1], I will either:

seek community approval of my adminship through a modified RfC (see process);
choose to take the matter to the Arbitration Committee;
resign my administrator tools and possibly stand again for adminship at some later date of my choosing;

provided that the following criteria are fulfilled:

That the matter concerns my actions as an administrator^[2] or edit-warring, rather than any other non-admin editing concern (for which you can use the standard dispute resolution mechanisms).
That the recall petition is made by "six editors in good standing" according to my own criteria.^[3]

The Recall Petition process

The petition shall operate as follows:

A clerk of my sole choosing, but chosen for ability to be impartial, will be selected by me to make sure that the petition process itself is smooth and that the requirements for petitioners are satisfied.
The petition start time will be constituted as when the first eligible petition announces intention to recall by posting on my talk page. Ineligible petitioners (as judged by me) will not start the process unless I choose to waive eligibility for that petitioner. Such waiver shall be binding. If it takes longer than 24 hours to find a clerk and begin the process, the petition start time will be constituted as when the page is created and ready for use.
A page in my user space will be created with sections for certified, unknown, and uncertified petitioners.
If attempts are made to delete the page, I will counter them to the best of my ability within the limits of policy and common practice (one recreate for a summary deletion, then I will work the MfD or DRV process as appropriate to argue for retention)... assistance in arguing the case for retention by those participating would be appreciated, but is not required as a condition of participation in the petition process. Deleting, or arguing for deletion of, the petition page by a petitioner, however, shall cause that petitioner to be disqualified from certification of the petition, unless I explicitly waive that disqualification. If the community ultimately deletes the page and it sticks I don't quite know what to do but will try to be reasonable.
Additional sections may be added as the community desires for comments of whatever sort. These shall have no bearing on the petition outcome except to sway public opinion. The clerk is empowered to enforce decorum at the clerk's (and my) discretion, subject of course to public opinion not looking kindly on suppression of expression.
I reserve the right to waive eligibility and numeric requirements at my sole discretion on a case by case basis. This means that I can deem a petition certified when it strictly would not have been. However this is only a waiver, it cannot make anyone ineligible or raise any numeric requirements. Waiver of requirements for one person does not waive them for others by default.
The clerk will move petitioner signatures from unknown to certified or uncertified based on eligibility.
After exactly 5 days the petition shall be over and the clerk shall carry out a tally of eligible petitioners. If at least 6 petitioners including the initiator are eligible, the petition shall be deemed certified and the next step of the process will be initiated. (the next step is one of the three, Modified RfC, self initiated RfAr, or resign "under a cloud" and stand for RfA at some later date of my choosing) as given above, at my choosing... the decision may be announced in advance of certification, at my option, but need not be.

The modified RfC process

The modified RfC will be constituted as follows:

A page in my userspace will be created.
Certification of the RfC will be waived.
If attempts are made to delete the page, I will counter them to the best of my ability within the limits of policy and common practice (one recreate for a summary deletion, then I will work the MfD or DRV process as appropriate to argue for retention)... assistance in arguing the case for retention by those participating would be appreciated but is not required as a condition of participation in the process. Arguing for deletion, however, shall cause that person's comments to be stricken or construed as favorable to retaining adminship, whichever is appropriate or more favourable to me, at my discretion. If the community ultimately deletes the page and it sticks I don't quite know what to do but will try to be reasonable.
A clerk of my sole choosing, but chosen for ability to be impartial, will be appointed to make sure that the RfC process itself goes smoothly, and to determine eligibility where appropriate.
The RfC will be started by referencing the entire text of the recall petition.
Two questions will be included: Should I keep my adminship/Should I resign my adminship.
Anyone qualified to vote in an ArbCom election, as construed in the most recent previous one to the initiation of the petition, or one then ongoing, whichever is more favourable (looser voting requirements), can sign under either of these two questions. Those not qualified will have their signatures and comments moved to sections that make it clear what their views are, but that do not count toward the total.
Any other sections desired may be added but will not have bearing on the outcome except to sway public opinion
At the end of exactly 5 days the modified RfC shall be over and the clerk shall carry out a tally of eligible commenters. If a simple majority to retain exists, I will not resign. If tied, or if a majority does not exist, I shall resign. Resignation shall be construed to have been "under a cloud", and if I wish to regain my adminship I will have to stand again via the normal RfA process.
Those that consider this not to be an RfC are welcome to give it whatever term they wish but these process steps will be used, and supersede standard RfC process where there is a conflict.
The conclusion of the RfC after the outcome is certified and my action is taken, if any, will conclude the matter as far as I am concerned, but the community is of course able to take whatever other steps they wish including starting a regular RfC, initiating an ArbCom case, etc.

Other considerations

No Double Jeopardy

Once this process concludes for matters raised by petitioners during an instance of this process, I will not honor a second recall request regarding the same matters. If however new matters arise, the community is welcome to initiate another recall.

No vexatious litigants

No petitioner may initiate or support a petition for my recall more than three times in any 365 day period. This does not apply to participation in a modified RfC.

Grace period

Any change in any provision of this that makes it more stringent to qualify for a petition or participate in any other part of the process, or more likely to lead to an outcome more favourable to me shall have a 2 week "grace period" during which any recall initiated will be under the old terms. Any change that is of the opposite sense (easier to qualify/participate, less favourable to me) shall go into effect immediately.

Withdrawal

I do not intend to withdraw but that's an intent, not a promise. However, I promise not to withdraw to escape the consequences of this commitment. The only time I will withdraw from this category is if no recall is currently underway. This is subject to the same 2 week grace period as the eligibility or any other changes, so any withdrawal has at least 2 weeks to go into effect.

Notes

^ Remember, this is a voluntary action, and does not preclude other dispute resolution processes (such as RfC or RfAr) being initiated by others, should they feel they have no recourse.
^ Those actions that involve the use of my administrator tools (page deletion & undeletion, page protection & unprotection, blocking and unblocking, edits made to modify fully-protected pages) and comments made as an administrator rather than a regular editor.
^
My criteria include the following requirements:
- that if the user calling for recall is an administrator, he must himself have been in this category for at least two weeks. This does not apply to non admins.
- that if the user calling for recall is a non admin, the user must have at least 4 months edit history under that ID or clearly connected and publicly disclosed related IDs, and at least 500 mainspace contributions, at least 100 of which must be substantive article improvements, and must have had no significant blocks for disruptive behaviour.
I reserve the right to waive requirements if I consider that the circumstances so merit.

I also reserve the right to modify the criteria or impose additional ones at any time, but I commit not to do this to avoid de-adminship in a manner that defeats the spirit of this category.

Any criteria changes which remove anyone from the eligibility list will not go into effect until two weeks have elapsed from the time of the diff making the change (the "grace period"), to give folk time to get a recall started under the old criteria if they so desire, and further, criteria will not be changed to remove anyone during the time of an active recall (starting from when notice is given by first petitioner, ending when the petition has been certified or decertified, in effect extending any 2 week grace period as necessary) Changes which only add eligibility, and do not remove anyone, are not subject to this limitation.

Process and text based on User:Lar/Accountability; comment on the importance of dialogue based on Húsönd's example. My thanks to them.

[1] Remember, this is a voluntary action, and does not preclude other dispute resolution processes (such as RfC or RfAr) being initiated by others, should they feel they have no recourse.

[2] Those actions that involve the use of my administrator tools (page deletion & undeletion, page protection & unprotection, blocking and unblocking, edits made to modify fully-protected pages) and comments made as an administrator rather than a regular editor.

[3] My criteria include the following requirements:
that if the user calling for recall is an administrator, he must himself have been in this category for at least two weeks. This does not apply to non admins.

that if the user calling for recall is a non admin, the user must have at least 4 months edit history under that ID or clearly connected and publicly disclosed related IDs, and at least 500 mainspace contributions, at least 100 of which must be substantive article improvements, and must have had no significant blocks for disruptive behaviour.
I reserve the right to waive requirements if I consider that the circumstances so merit.

I also reserve the right to modify the criteria or impose additional ones at any time, but I commit not to do this to avoid de-adminship in a manner that defeats the spirit of this category.

Any criteria changes which remove anyone from the eligibility list will not go into effect until two weeks have elapsed from the time of the diff making the change (the "grace period"), to give folk time to get a recall started under the old criteria if they so desire, and further, criteria will not be changed to remove anyone during the time of an active recall (starting from when notice is given by first petitioner, ending when the petition has been certified or decertified, in effect extending any 2 week grace period as necessary) Changes which only add eligibility, and do not remove anyone, are not subject to this limitation.

[4] that if the user calling for recall is an administrator, he must himself have been in this category for at least two weeks. This does not apply to non admins.

[5] that if the user calling for recall is a non admin, the user must have at least 4 months edit history under that ID or clearly connected and publicly disclosed related IDs, and at least 500 mainspace contributions, at least 100 of which must be substantive article improvements, and must have had no significant blocks for disruptive behaviour.

[1]

[2]

[3]