User:Lar/Accountability

If you have come here to place a request 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; (no consensus == no change) (see separate section for process)
choose to take the matter to ArbCom; (see separate section for process)
resign my powers "under a cloud"^[2] and possibly stand again for adminship at some later date of my choosing; (see separate section for process)

once the "six editors in good standing" count has been met using my own criteria^[3]
and the matter concerns use of my admin powers at this wiki rather than a non-admin editing concern (use the standard dispute resolution mechanisms), a use of CheckUser (use the ombudsman process, or take the matter to the Audit Subcommittee, as appropriate, if standard dispute resolution does not resolve the matter), or actions at another wiki (use the processes at that wiki).

The rest of this page fills out particulars and commits to certain processes in advance so as to reduce ambiguity or the possible perception that I will change the rules as I go along to get the desired outcome.^[4]

Note: This page has a talk page because I value input and feedback on this whole thing. There's some lively discussion there already, and you, gentle reader, are invited to comment as well.

^ Remember, this is a voluntary action, and does not preclude an RfC or RfAr being initiated by others, should others feel they have no recourse.
^ This is the colloquial term for what is more formally described as "under controversial circumstances", see, for example this ArbCom principle
^
Lar's criteria include the requirements:
- that if the user calling for recall is an admin, the admin must themselves 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 within the last 4 months.
Lar reserves the right to impose additional criteria at any time. However Lar commits that 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, that 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.
^ If you spot holes, now would be a good time to point them out so they can be fixed.

[1] Remember, this is a voluntary action, and does not preclude an RfC or RfAr being initiated by others, should others feel they have no recourse.

[cloud-2] This is the colloquial term for what is more formally described as "under controversial circumstances", see, for example this ArbCom principle

[3] Lar's criteria include the requirements:
that if the user calling for recall is an admin, the admin must themselves 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 within the last 4 months.
Lar reserves the right to impose additional criteria at any time. However Lar commits that 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, that 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 admin, the admin must themselves 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 within the last 4 months.

[4] If you spot holes, now would be a good time to point them out so they can be fixed.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]