Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 community sentiment on binding desysop procedure

TL;DR version: There is wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input, but does not involve ArbCom. (For example, opening a specific form of discussion on WP:AN/I.) However, except in the case of inactivity there is no clear consensus over what this alternative should be.

Long version: There were a number of themes in this discussion worth noting:

• The only process currently in use that doesn’t involve ArbCom (or resignation) is based on inactivity. (Note: there is an ongoing discussion at the Village Pump about adding another criteria for inactivity. This RfC closure does not modify or effect its outcome.)
• The current process of desysopping an admin is perceived by some as being unnecessarily difficult.
• Some participants at WP:RfA routinely vote against nominees based on the assertion "it’s too hard to desysop an admin". The validity of this assertion was questioned, but not seriously debated. (Note: It has become something of a cliche to state that the process to become an admin is broken.)
• Concern about Admins being harassed for making tough or unpopular calls. (Related to this is that not all admins are 100% confident they made the right decision 100% of the time.)
• Similar to this is the desire to avoid WikiDrama in any desysopping process. It was claimed that opening a case with ArbCom leads to WikiDrama. (Note: WikiDrama exists elsewhere on Wikipedia. For example, threads at WP:AN/I have been known to grow to enormous lengths. The discussion at WP:FRAM is not the only one that, when concluded, was longer than most novels.)
• The desysopping processes at other Wikimedia projects were described, but what works (or doesn’t work) at other projects may not work here.
• The option of requiring admins to be re-confirmed periodically was mentioned, but did not attract any attention that I could find. (This has been proposed in the past.)
• There is a desire for the community to handle problematic admins directly without needing to start a case at ArbCom; the community should be able decide matters like this. Use of a discussion at WP:AN/I was mentioned more than once. ArbCom is a powerful, but often slow-moving process. (Note: this closer admits he would welcome some community-based alternative to ArbCom, but believes that until consensus emerges about what it should be, no community-based one exists.)

Despite all of the comments, no suggested community-based desysopping procedure gathered enough support to be favored by a clear consensus. It was admitted that without some formal process, any community-based procedure could be gamed, & any admin who made an action that was best for Wikipedia yet angered a given group (e.g, Church of Scientology) could still be targeted through it. Any attempt to address this vulnerability complicated the procedure. The result were proposed procedures that, frankly, seemed to be more complex than starting a case at ArbCom, & still offered no guarantee of protecting admins who made difficult actions, let alone reduced WikiDrama, better than using ArbCom. Still, the hope persists.

Useful pages related to this topic: Wikipedia:Removing administrator rights, Wikipedia:De-adminship proposal checklist