You could simply ask certain admins to not do them...
Like, how hard would it be to say "Yo dawg, I don't think you should do deleteion appeals just yet since you just got your rights and all. Best break that shit in and then we can talk. Cool?"
In all honesty... I'd be pretty comfortable with doing deletion appeal. I've reviewed a lot of pastas in both the Workshop and on the main site and I do consider myself to be a good judge of quality. I can even remember asking if I could help with it back when I was just a rollback, I think. And lately I've noticed Travis seems to be the only one doing any work on it- not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just a lot of work and I really would be glad to help out if possible. As long as the author gives me a Pastebin link to their story or something.
Shining-Armor wrote:
You could simply ask certain admins to not do them...
Like, how hard would it be to say "Yo dawg, I don't think you should do deleteion appeals just yet since you just got your rights and all. Best break that shit in and then we can talk. Cool?"
I suppose that is a possibility.
You raise some good points, and I see how this argument could be made for the average wiki. Indeed, the only major differences between VCROC and administrator are access to the admin dashboard and the ability to view and restore deleted articles. But the reason there's such a large divide between these user groups here is because each is tasked with different responsibilities. VCROC is awarded to diligent editors who face obstacles that could be overcome if they had the tools associated with that right. Administrators do much of the same, but emphasis is placed on deletion appeal. Moreover, administrators resolve conflicts between users, investigate site issues, and make sure everything is running in an orderly fashion. In short: VCROC and administrators have similar rights, but admins have additional responsibilities while VCROC are primarily concerned with quality control.
Could we abolish VCROC altogether and have administrators perform all these duties? Well, yeah. But clearly defining what is expected of someone is a good way of making sure work gets done.
With the few VCROCs that we have, I think Maria brings up a fine point here. We might as well just just do away with VCROCs and just mitigate the one or two we have into adminship. I trust the VCROCs we have with admin rights; they wouldn't have the VCROC position if we didn't trust them with the community's stories, right? That's what this site is now without a chat - the internet's best amateur horror (let's admit it, this site IS that). As far as deletion appeal? The only reason I wanted an admin slot was to help with that. Sure, Travis is the main guy doing it now, but TELL me you think Grizzly Bear (Veronica) couldn't handle it. Jesus Christ, she's one of the site's better reviewers. And with Underscorre probably getting VCROC rights (looking at his superior skills), I wouldn't have an issue with him being on our team. Is there another VCROC (too lazy to look right now)? If so, I'm sure I'd be fine with them too
I'm all for this. Cleric, Skelly and Sloshed, let's seriously consider this. As I said, my vote is a 
 Support - for this. I don't see any valid reason to oppose.
Likferd wrote: You raise some good points, and I see how this argument could be made for the average wiki. Indeed, the only major differences between VCROC and administrator are access to the admin dashboard and the ability to view and restore deleted articles. But the reason there's such a large divide between these user groups here is because each is tasked with different responsibilities. VCROC is awarded to diligent editors who face obstacles that could be overcome if they had the tools associated with that right. Administrators do much of the same, but emphasis is placed on deletion appeal. Moreover, administrators resolve conflicts between users, investigate site issues, and make sure everything is running in an orderly fashion. In short: VCROC and administrators have similar rights, but admins have additional responsibilities while VCROC are primarily concerned with quality control.
Could we abolish VCROC altogether and have administrators perform all these duties? Well, yeah. But clearly defining what is expected of someone is a good way of making sure work gets done.
No offense Bitter, but you really don't bring any valid points to the table with this.
 Is there another VCROC (too lazy to look right now)? If so, I'm sure I'd be fine with them too.
Aside from me, no. Thiago is running for it but it doesn't seem that his app will pass at this time, while Underscorre should recieve his rights soon.
Honestly, the difference between the two is clear, but in a way, it's also unnecessary and silly. The reason it's currently here is almost basically to decide who would be good for admin, despite the differences, but the people we have there and the people possibly getting it I'm sure would do well with full-on adminship.
TL;DR Â Support -
Tbh the only reason I said I wasn't comfortable with VCROCs being able to do Deletion Appeal is because some of the past VCROC members have, in my opinion, demonstrated rather poor judgment in regards to quality assessment (G4T0R4D3xEN3RGY being the most recent example I can think of).
As much as I like the sound of having a sort of "pre-admin" right to see how well potential admins perform when given user rights, I think it would be more practical to just not give anyone like that deletion rights in the first place.
Also, I don't really think admins have that much more responsibility than VCROC in all honesty. They're both essentially wiki-janitors in my eyes.
EDIT: changed my mind
Reposting this here because I feel it's relevant.
ImGonnaBeThatGuy wrote:
A week or so ago, I roughly outlined the roles of rights holders:
- Rollbacks should be doing the majority of the editing. Formatting correction, grammar and punctuation fixes. They should also be marking for review and doing Delete Nows and giving valid reasons. To get to VCROC they need to be active and show good judgement in regard to quality.
- VCROC should be doing the majority of QC and deletions. They should also be active editors and reviewers. They need to be active in site matters. Adminship should only be given to people who show good judgement not only in regard to quality but in handling users, site change proposals, be knowledgable of site rules and TOU. Adminship shouldn't be an automatic promotion due to seniority. We don't need a lot of admins.
- Admin should be making sure the site runs smoothly. Answering user question, responding to conflicts, looking into issues. They need to be active in discussions about site issues. They need to help with deletion appeal, as well as doing QC.
That was one nice thing about VCROC, it could, theoretically, divide the labor a little more. Theory and practice, though.
What would happen now is that VCROC gets combined with admin. This essentially means that admins do EVERYTHING.
LOLSKELETONS wrote: Reposting this here because I feel it's relevant.
ImGonnaBeThatGuy wrote:
A week or so ago, I roughly outlined the roles of rights holders:
- Rollbacks should be doing the majority of the editing. Formatting correction, grammar and punctuation fixes. They should also be marking for review and doing Delete Nows and giving valid reasons. To get to VCROC they need to be active and show good judgement in regard to quality.
- VCROC should be doing the majority of QC and deletions. They should also be active editors and reviewers. They need to be active in site matters. Adminship should only be given to people who show good judgement not only in regard to quality but in handling users, site change proposals, be knowledgable of site rules and TOU. Adminship shouldn't be an automatic promotion due to seniority. We don't need a lot of admins.
- Admin should be making sure the site runs smoothly. Answering user question, responding to conflicts, looking into issues. They need to be active in discussions about site issues. They need to help with deletion appeal, as well as doing QC.
That was one nice thing about VCROC, it could, theoretically, divide the labor a little more. Theory and practice, though.
What would happen now is that VCROC gets combined with admin. This essentially means that admins do EVERYTHING.
Yes the admins do everything, that's sort of the point of a System Operator. Having a separate group with nearly identical permissions purely for the purpose of "labor division" is mind bogglingly stupid. Instead of having a completely separate rights groups for this why not just get together and sort of assign each other jobs or specific tasks that they should focus on? It really is that simple to do.