ESB:User rights review/Jensonk/voting

User Rights Review Discussion Archive

The following user rights review discussion has been resolved. The page has been protected and now serves as an archive. Do not edit this page.

Date Resolved: July 20, 2016

Result: No consensus among community with only 63% in favor of removal. General consensus is 70%. Policy requires 70% of administrators, of which only 60% of participating administrators favor removal while it is a total of 55% of all administrators in favor of removal, as one administrator did not vote.

Regardless, there is no consensus. 17 are in favor of removal, 6 in favor of keep, and 4 in favor of suspension.

Per the current suspension policy, as there have been concerns in which the assistant has not listened to administrators and #1 was exhausted multiple times and #2 was skipped and went straight to a user rights review, a suspension can be in order as a compromise.

Given the amount of divide more than most user review discussions and frustration from the community, since there was no consensus but real concerns exist, Jenson will be suspended from the administration for 3 months. I made the amount longer because while some were in support of keep or a shorter suspension, others opting for removal had real concerns, hence the amount was changed.

At the end of the 3 months, we will have another discussion/vote on whether or not to demote Jensonk, since after a suspension, the only options will be to keep or remove. Jenson is strongly urged to look at this and reexamine his behavior for the next 3 months if he wants to keep his position. Until then, he will be suspended.

Introduction

After discussing Jensonk's status as an assistant, many in the community question whether or not he should remain in that position. During that discussion, about half of the participants say Jenson is unfit for adminship, while the other half was either neutral, in favor of a suspension, or opposed to the demotion. Clearly divided, but leaning one way, it's time to vote.

Jensonk's defense

The following was submitted by Jensonk, in defense of keeping his position as an assistant:

"I am going to start off by saying that I was one of the first assistant users on this wiki. At the time I became an assistant, the only other user to be in that position was 120d. In addition to this, I was first assistant user to be in this position for 1 year. I also had several people asking me about what an assistant position is. This is probably because they noticed me being the only assistant user on the badge leaderboard. A lot of those threads were before we had ESB:Requests for assistant. With that out of the way, I'm going to think back about my attitude and how takes part on my user appearance. It seams that in threads from a year or two ago, I was a friendly and delighted to respond to them. But now, it seams that I have became I bit more grumpy and discourteous with responding to threads. It may be because I have changed moods in the past year or some users might have annoyed me. I think one true problem is that I have been trying to get involved with too much stuff on the wiki this year. I should not always try to get myself involved with some situations because I am either unneeded or I just make it worse. I should just stay out it and let the administrator(s) handle it. I think a second true problem is that I have been saying a bit of the obvious stuff lately when it's really not needed. However, unlike the first problem, it goes in a more neutral direction of how the users think about it. Stating the obvious is not always rude, but it depends on the situation and how I am saying it. I would still like to be an assistant user so I can edit templates, timeline pages, and semi-protected pages. If you really want me to, I can just stop trying to be involved and not say anything if it's not going to help what's going on in the current state of affairs. I learned that being rude does not really make things any better and can really put down someone (Note: I also had this issue with communication back in 2014 back when I was formerly an administrator). I can think of more friendly and nice ways to address a thread. I am going to end off by saying that people in general rather like a nice and happy person than a mean jerk who doesn't realize the obvious."

Instructions

In this discussion, vote whether Jensonk should {{Keep}} his status as an assistant or if he should be removed ({{Remove}}) from the administration. You can also vote for suspension ({{Suspend}}) and give an amount of time.

Voting key:

{{Keep}} - Jensonk should remain as an assistant.
{{Suspend}} - Jensonk should be suspended (time to be determined later)
{{Remove}} - Jensonk should be removed as an assistant.

This discussion will end on Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 2:30 p.m., eastern time. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 18:22, July 12, 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

Weak Keep - or Suspend - for two months. I strongly agree with AW10's comment in the first stage of this discussion. Jensonk's behavior has nothing to do with editing. Administrators have been demoted before because it has involved their editing behavior. Administrators have been demoted due to bad behavior in their administrator of the wiki. On the other hand, Jenson is an assistant, NOT an administrator. He is not an authority figure here. He is clearly unfit to be an administrator, hence he is not. As far as assistant is concerned, we need to look at the job of an assistant. An assistant is NOT an administrator. Administrators have more responsibility in the community and have the ability to make certain decisions. All Jenson has is extra editing privileges. Certainly he could be suspended for a time, but I don't think a full demotion is necessary. He is just an assistant and he does a good job at it. He could improve his communication skills and I hope he does. If we could block his ability to post on walls and threads, that is one thing, but we cannot do that. If Jensonk continues questionable behavior, he can be blocked. However, I believe he should be able to edit extra pages. He should not have the authority to make decisions, as that is the job of the administration to carry out through their own decisions and community discussions. Stop treating Jenson like an administrator, because he is not. Administrators are held to higher standards than assistants. The only time we should consider removing an assistant is if they are either inactive or abusing their extra privileges. Jensonk is doing neither. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 18:22, July 12, 2016 (UTC)

Remove - given that the decision will likely be remove or suspend, I would opt to remove him. A suspension would prevent any promotion, even if it was rollback. If he is just demoted and his behavior improves, he can make a request at any time. If he is suspended, he would have to wait. — AMK152 (Wall • Contrib) 12:39, July 17, 2016 (UTC)

Extremely Strong Remove - Sorry AMK but I strongly disagree with AW10s comment. His rights should be removed as I already stated. If you and AW10 are more active around the wiki, you'll know the full story. ZeoSpark Talk Contribs Edits 18:24,7/12/2016
Remove - I agree with Zeo. мιѕмαgιυѕ ѕтαя wall ● conтrιвѕ
Extremely Strong Remove - Just, no Jersey the DIEHL (SpongeFreddy777) wall • contribs18:31, July 12, 2016 (UTC)
Remove - —It's Kelpy G!' 18:38, July 12, 2016 (UTC)
Remove -—

Cans48 _(Messages)

Weak Remove - Well, I was thinking long and hard before voting and I finally came down to this. While Jensonk is a great editor, he has had many iffy moments on the wiki, with rude comments and things like that. If we have someone on our staff who does things like that, it'll give our wiki a bad name for the newer users. So for now, I'm opposing.

ChocolateBrownieBoy	Talk	Contribs	Edits

Remove - Per Zeo AustinD-3 (Message Me Here!)
Remove - ѕqυι∂∂ℓєωαя∂ ^{❮мεssαgε ωαℓℓ ● cσηтяιвυтισηs ● ε∂ιтcσυηт❯}
Remove - [ User page ● Message wall ● Surprise me! ]
Remove - I was thinking about suspending him to wake him up, but he's already been blocked enough and has had many chances. I'm sorry Jensonk. SσпıcTнεEρıc (talk) 19:08, July 12, 2016 (UTC)
Remove - Nicko756 ^{(M•C•E) Sign!} 19:57, July 12, 2016 (UTC)
Keep - I believe Jensonk is a great guy, based on his work, and I think he should keep his position. User:Alexjakob99
Keep - Per my comment in discussion phase. AW10 Talk Contribs E-Mail 22:03,7/12/2016
Keep - He's always been a nice person, and I think he deserves to keep his rights. He's made mistakes, he's had moments where he might have had an off-day and he was sassy, and the votes clearly don't favor him, but that doesn't mean I should hop on the bandwagon. -BlastWrecker29
Remove -See my comment in the discussion. Auron ⚡ Yeah, that's right baby! Welcome to my locker! ⚡
Strong Remove - It's not like this is the first time. Last year he behaved like that so he got demoted to assistant, now he's being demoting from assistant just after a year. He's had enough. It's like he thinks this wiki is a show and he's the actor. Jensonk, your behavior is not tolerable. This needs to happen. No doubt your contributions are excellent, but your recent have been useless, such as making an edit that doesn't visually change the page. Now you're making useless comments everywhere.
Suspend - I think he should suspended, so that he can get some fresh air. Maybe two or three weeks. When he gets his rights back, he might be ready and not as grumpy as he was in the past. I don't think we should go as far to revoke his rights. I mean, he's been an assistant for a while, and he's done a good job, hasn't he? So a couple weeks of suspension should be good enough, and possible revocation in the future. Thank you. -
Snowstripe ⁽^M ^• ^C ^• ^E⁾ | Friday, April 19, 2024
Suspend - I'm good with two months. ~JCM 03:21, July 13, 2016 (UTC)
Remove - --Tominator777 (talk) 04:11, July 13, 2016 (UTC)
Suspend - Frankly, Jensonk is good here, so removing his rights would not be the best idea. And letting him keep them without some sort of thing wouldn't be good either. Suspend for some time. Tan Ham Man 15:46,7/13/2016
Remove - Suspending Jensonk will do 0% good - we've threatened him with demotion before and he hasn't cared. I agree with AMK and AW10 in that Jensonk's rights are purely for editing purposes meaning his behaviour doesn't have as much of an impact. On the other hand, we've got an Assistant reverting edits and protecting pages who makes mistakes (which isn't the issue) but then doesn't care about advice or warnings he gets and ignores them - is that what being part of a community is about? I like Jensonk as an editor but I find it hard to ignore his lack of caring for any mistakes he makes or generally for other users to be honest. No arguing with his editing credentials however, a valuable editor to the community. --Spongebob456 ^talk 17:59, July 13, 2016 (UTC)
Remove - Per Zeo. Sorry, Jensonk. The island is mine! MINE! 05:24, July 14, 2016 (UTC)
Weak Keep - I know I haven't been on much but I do remember Jensonk was always active as an assistant when I first came to the wiki until last year. I might change my vote to suspend but as of now, it's staying at weak keep.

Koolkitty	Talk	Contribs	Edits

Remove - per Sonic Jordan2001 ^(M•C•E) {{{1}}} 21:58, July 16, 2016 (UTC)
Keep - I feel like Jensonk is a good user. While, I know he has made a few mistakes assuming that he is bad because of those mistakes is not good. 120d Talk Contribs 120d 02:55, July 19, 2016 (UTC)
Keep - Based on merit, I believe Jensonk has done his part as an assistant. And upon reading his defense, I am inclined to believe that he has come to realize that he has made mistakes in the past that he needs to address going forward. Having said that, I feel that Jensonk should be given yet another chance to prove himself. Sponge of Mystery (Depth)

Comments