Forum:Small change to RS:RFA

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Small change to RS:RFA
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 28 October 2010 by Cook Me Plox.

Many sysops don't want hilites. It should be put in place by the new sysop themself if they want it. As Azaz's edit said to get consensus, here we go.

PLEASE NOTE: This discussion is not about whether we should have hilites or not. Thanks, HaloTalk 21:14, October 25, 2010 (UTC)


Support - Changing text back to "# If the user wishes, they may add their own name to the appropriate section on [[MediaWiki:Wikia.css/hilite]]." HaloTalk 18:18, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - It's been the norm so far. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 18:22, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Making it optional seems to be a good idea.   Swizz Talk   Events!   18:39, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - So why exactly does this need consensus? Just add in the hilites by default, and if a sysop doesn't want them, they can either remove them or request that they be removed. Why is this an issue that needs to be discussed on the Yew Grove? Andrew talk 20:09, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Azaz said to get consensus. That's why it needs consensus. And I am stating that it should be the exact opposite of what you want. The hilites can be added by the candidate once they have been sysopped if they so wish. HaloTalk 20:11, October 25, 2010 (UTC)
We've already almost had an edit war over this nonsense before, might as well make sure that both sides talk it out.-- 20:13, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I'm not thrilled with seeing yet another thread on the AEAE topic. Administrators are hilited by the bureaucrat by default. If they don't like it, they can remove it and move on. This system is already functional. It has not, is not, nor will it ever be a problem. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 20:12, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

This has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with AEAE other than the fact that you just said it. I think it makes more sense for the new sysop to get to make the choice, it saves time on everyone's part. HaloTalk 20:16, October 25, 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to be completely honest here. Considering that the two people who have attempted to make this change in the past also oppose having hilites in general, I consider it reasonable to conclude that their desire to remove hilites was a catalyst for making the change in the first place. Because their reason for wanting to remove hilites is because they feel it violates AEAE, changing the wording on the RFA page more or less becomes an AEAE issue. I don't consider the change itself that important, because the wiki will continue to function either way. The thing I'm concerned with here is that we are giving the issue any attention at all, considering how horribly minuscule it is. We have more important things to worry about than minute changes to a functional process, like how to adapt to the new skin or getting Tlul unblocked. I'm tired of all these heated discussions on unimportant issues that are making the wiki a less pleasant place to be, yet I don't want to submit to something I don't think is right. With all that said, I oppose this in an effort to protest the ideas behind the change more so than the change itself. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 21:48, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Well then, this is pointless. It is so much simpler to keep things the way they are now..sysops are perfectly capable of removing their own names afterwards. Andrew talk 20:21, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

One revert is all that hard? Are you serious? Good lord dude. It doesn't even affect you. HaloTalk 20:24, October 25, 2010 (UTC)
Let me make something very clear for you: I am not in the mood for this. Don't even think about belittling me for having a difference in opinion. You will not enjoy the end result. Andrew talk 23:34, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

..sysops are perfectly capable of removing their own names afterwards. Enough said. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:29, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

And they are also perfectly capable of adding them in the first place if they want them...HaloTalk 20:33, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Stelercus [except for the bit where he mentions AEAE]. Matt (t) 20:36, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe you would like to explain to me what this has to do with AEAE then? HaloTalk 20:39, October 25, 2010 (UTC)
I clarfied. ^ Matt (t) 21:08, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I want a purple underline. It will inform others that I'm not anything special and that I'm not authorized to do anything special. It's actually more difficult to check if I'm not special; they would have to check admin lists, crat lists, bot lists, and so on, so it's more useful to give me a purple underline than it is to give admins green ones. Leftiness 21:03, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

This has absolutely nothing to deal with whether we should have hilites or not. -.- HaloTalk 21:13, October 25, 2010 (UTC)
It has everything to do with whether we should have highlights. Green highlights for admins are less useful than a theoretical purple highlight for normal users, so I used the statement to make that point. Considering RS:UH and RS:AR - especially if they're added to the welcome notice, that some users insist that this issue is minute in contradiction to others continuously bringing it to the yew grove bothers me, and that the same users who insist it's minute continue to argue about it bothers me further because, truly, if it were so minute an issue, highlights would be removed if only to stop the pointless bickering. Honestly, I'd like to see "There are exceptions to equality as determined by consensus" somewhere and possibly with more professional wording in AEAE for the same purpose of preventing pointless bickering. Leftiness 23:54, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Sysops by default should have the hilites, I know it is a personal decision on whether or not to keep it, but since it says on our RS:ADMIN page that they have hilites, we should give them the hilites by default. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 21:14, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - How many sysops don't have hilites? And how many do? Why should we cater our practices to an extremely tiny minority especially when that tiny minority is perfectly capable of handling these matters themselves? kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 21:45, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - If a sysop does not want a hilite, then he or she can remove it. Most do, so it's better to have them by default. Only one sysop has removed it immediately after it has been added (Ajr), so it's not too big of an issue. --LiquidTalk 21:49, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support If a new sysop wants to show off their glowing green name they can at least have the balls to do it themselves instead of hiding behind the fact that it has always been the way.--Degenret01 23:58, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

I find it unfortunate that you would immediately jump to that conclusion. What the hell happened to RS:AGF? Andrew talk 02:56, October 26, 2010 (UTC)
I don't really think AGF applies. Should we seriously assume that the purpose is to inform without taking the slightest bit of pride in it, and, since the purpose is already accomplished with a list of admins and an admin request page, isn't it obvious? Again, I find nothing wrong with highlights; I just want things determined by consensus to be acknowledged in policy to prevent further argument. Leftiness 23:54, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I'm fed up with attempts from a minority of editors who think it is vastly important to remove the false aurora of sysops as much as possible. Live with the fact that hilites serve are more beneficial than detrimental and that removing them will not fix anything. Why don't we abolish the term admins/sysops as well? That word makes them seem better than others, doesn't it? I like the arguments presented by others as well, per all. 222 talk 05:48, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

support - an admin can edit the page themselves and should do this themselves if they want it. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 06:51, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Although I'm not an old sysop with age, I'm not exactly new to it either. Honestly, changing the hilites are very easy, but really most people hardly see it except at the top of their pages, and if they can't deal with that they can put a sticky note over it or change it. I say keep the current system. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 00:33, October 27, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Given that most of the sysops prefer to have hilites, the default should be automatical hiliting. bad_fetustalk 16:22, October 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I think the default way of giving hilites is perfectly fine. Farming cape (t).png Lil cloud 9 Talk 00:43, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Cloud and Chess. Ruud10KRalph.png 08:34, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

Why? - I question the purpose of this proposal, it makes no flying difference to the function and work of the wiki. If an administrator wants to become rouge, they can already do it themselves. I don't clue to why everyone is bringing in 20 different policies to counter argue what could be the smallest proposal that this wiki has ever seen... RSN: Warthog Rhys Talk Completionist's cape... Coming soon. 15:05, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

Withdrawn - It's not that big of a deal, and I'd rather have the forum closed. HaloTalk 18:50, October 28, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - Withdrawal. ʞooɔ 18:53, October 28, 2010 (UTC)