Yes, I am an administrator, but I try to keep editing and admining separate. If you feel that I have behaved inappropriately please let me know and I will do my best to remedy the situation. If I do something really stupid, you might note that I am open to recall, with the process described below (borrowed from here).
Recall process
The process looks similar to an RfA, but requires certification by four users. Two of these users must be administrators, and all of them must be in good standing and have had a registered user account for a period of no less than one year. The certifying editors should be users who have not been directly affected by a sanction imposed by the admin being brought to RfAS in the prior 6 months. Standards to participate in RfAS discussions are the same as for RfA, including length and format, with certification replacing the nomination sections and other cosmetic changes as the community sees fit. Once initiated, the RfAS must be certified and evidence (including diffs) presented within 48 hours or it may be deleted without prejudice. Once a party has certified an action against an admin, the certifier may not certify another action against the same admin for a period of 12 months, although the party may participate in a later proceeding certified by other editors.
Community participation
Each participant can state their reasons for supporting one of the following options or similar: Affirm (or No Action), Sanction or Desysop. A Bureaucrat may consider any opinion that isn't an Affirm or No action as a call for some type of action, including actions other than the stated option, for the purpose of determining consensus.
Participants, the certifying parties and the subject of the RfAS may also ask questions to either the certifying editors or the subject of the RfAS. A discussion area will be available for general discussion of the material.
Determining consensus
While the RfAS process is not a vote and there is no numerical "line in the sand", the threshold to place sanctions against the administrator is around 50% voting for an option other than Affirm. Discretion is given solely to the Bureaucrat closing the process as to the weight of any vote or comment, including which to discount completely. They may impose other restrictions or sanctions as the situation warrants. The process can only be closed by an uninvolved Bureaucrat regardless of obvious outcome, excepting intervention by the Arbitration Committee. Possible results are within the discretion of the closing Bureaucrat and are limited one or more of the following:
- No action or Affirm, with or without admonishment or other minor restriction
- Sanction including topic bans or temporary loss of admin bit up to no more than 6 months
- Desysop without prejudice to start a new RfA at any time.
Yes, I am an administrator, but I try to keep editing and admining separate. If you feel that I have behaved inappropriately please let me know and I will do my best to remedy the situation. If I do something really stupid, you might note that I am open to recall, with the process described below (borrowed from here).
Recall process
The process looks similar to an RfA, but requires certification by four users. Two of these users must be administrators, and all of them must be in good standing and have had a registered user account for a period of no less than one year. The certifying editors should be users who have not been directly affected by a sanction imposed by the admin being brought to RfAS in the prior 6 months. Standards to participate in RfAS discussions are the same as for RfA, including length and format, with certification replacing the nomination sections and other cosmetic changes as the community sees fit. Once initiated, the RfAS must be certified and evidence (including diffs) presented within 48 hours or it may be deleted without prejudice. Once a party has certified an action against an admin, the certifier may not certify another action against the same admin for a period of 12 months, although the party may participate in a later proceeding certified by other editors.
Community participation
Each participant can state their reasons for supporting one of the following options or similar: Affirm (or No Action), Sanction or Desysop. A Bureaucrat may consider any opinion that isn't an Affirm or No action as a call for some type of action, including actions other than the stated option, for the purpose of determining consensus.
Participants, the certifying parties and the subject of the RfAS may also ask questions to either the certifying editors or the subject of the RfAS. A discussion area will be available for general discussion of the material.
Determining consensus
While the RfAS process is not a vote and there is no numerical "line in the sand", the threshold to place sanctions against the administrator is around 50% voting for an option other than Affirm. Discretion is given solely to the Bureaucrat closing the process as to the weight of any vote or comment, including which to discount completely. They may impose other restrictions or sanctions as the situation warrants. The process can only be closed by an uninvolved Bureaucrat regardless of obvious outcome, excepting intervention by the Arbitration Committee. Possible results are within the discretion of the closing Bureaucrat and are limited one or more of the following:
- No action or Affirm, with or without admonishment or other minor restriction
- Sanction including topic bans or temporary loss of admin bit up to no more than 6 months
- Desysop without prejudice to start a new RfA at any time.