User:PaleAqua/Sentry (draft)

( Drafting an alternate proposal. )

Proposed user right: Sentry

This is an alternate proposal to the recently proposed "vandal fighter" right above based on various comments made to it. I've included notes highlighting the differences.

• User right name: While this proposal uses the name "sentry", consider the name to be a place holder.
  • Note: There were concerns about the name "fighter", which I share

Rights and responsibilities

• Sentries can block unconfirmed accounts.
  • Note the lack of a time limit
• Sentries can soft-block IP addresses.
  • Note the lack of a time limit
• Sentries can unblock users blocked by other sentries.
• Admins can endorse blocks by sentries at which point only admins can reverse / revise the block.
• Admins can reject blocks by sentries ( even one that has already expired ). A rejected block should not show up in the block log for the blocked user, but should show up in a log for actions performed by the sentry ( or possibly former sentry. )
  • Note: This is intended to deal with the pristine block log concern in the biting misuse case based on concerns brought up above.
• Sentry actions will be viewable in a special page or log.

Requirements for gaining and retaining access and methods/reasons for removal of access

• Request for sentry rights would be made at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions.
• Gaining the sentry right does not automatically grant any other rights.
  • Note: Vandal fighter tied getting the right to having certain rights and also needed reviewer status. This right will have its on independent criteria and is intended to be stand alone. Besides the other rights should be easy enough to get by anyone that meets requirements for this right.
• If this alternate proposal passes a set of criteria guidelines should be developed that a potential sentry should have before getting the right. Something along the lines of demonstrating need / judgement by having made X number of reports at AIV and no recent bad reports.
  • Note: There were several concerns about the criteria being too loose. I believe getting such a user right needs to have a criteria that shows judgement suitable to using it.
• Sentries that have not edited in the past year This number probably should be the same as the admin removal threshold will automatically lose the sentry user right with no prejudice about requesting in again in the future. Unlike the admin bit though, such a request will need to meet current criteria.
  • Note: Pretty much same reason as admins lose the right
• Sentries may only use the granted abilities to deal with obvious spam and vandalism. Anything else will be considered abuse or misuse.
• A sentry that abuses, wheel wars or otherwise misuses ( including carelessness ) this user right shall lose it and may not get it back without a showing of community support. Effectively this means that a sentry that loses the right under such a cloud only real avenue to get back the ability to block is to pass a normal RfA.
  • Note: This right will still be easier to get than passing an RfA which means given the power it should have a strong counter balance against misuse. Abuse and wheel warring are pretty obvious, but careless misuse such as making too many bad blocks etc. should also lose the right as new users are the life blood of wikipedia.
• The first X months after software changes allowing this feature are made available the number of sentries shall be limited to Y new sentries a month/week.
  • Note: Not exactly a trial, but a slow start means that if a major problems is found with criteria etc. or even software bugs in how it works that time can be taken to fix or re-evaluateo.
• This proposal does not cover page protection which was covered in the proposed "vandal fighter".
  • Note: It is possible such much be considered in a future proposal, semi-protecting or pending change protecting a page impacts more than just the vandal and needs to be dealt with more care. In addition, a vandal that hops IPs, socks probably need a higher level of intervention than what a sentry is intended to provide so such situations should be escalated regardless.