Inkipedia:Proposals/Passed/Demotion Policy Overhaul

This page is an archive.

It contains older discussions that are no longer ongoing. If you wish to discuss one of the topics here, please bring it up on the current discussion page.

Welcome to the first ever official proposal. This first one has intentionally been chosen to be a simple introduction to the process to help users with the change from Ink Pump voting to Proposal-style voting. If you have any questions, ask below in the discussion section or the proposals policy talk page.

This is a fairly simple request to overhaul the current demotion policy. The suggested rewritten policy can be found on this draft page. The major changes or highlights include:

• Clarifying why a user would lose rights, and organizing them in a way to be highlighted as a reason when forming a request.
• Tips on how to write a request, or information to include.
• Specifying examples of demotions that are not inactivity based, and providing information on the process to perform these types of demotions at all.
• Vastly cutting down the warning window for inactivity announcements before a demotion request can be made (30 days -> 7 days).
• Corrected a loophole that would allow staff to avoid demotion by making a single or few edits before returning to inactivity.
• More information overall.

If the policy passes, the draft will become the new form for the demotion policy. Trig Jegman - 15:43, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Start date: 24 July 2023

End date: 14 August 2023

Support

1. I greatly appreciate the closing of the "loophole". Besides that, the other big change is reducing the 30 day warning window to 7. This makes sense, given that with a 30 day window the requester may forget about the matter. That, combined with all the additional information, should make the process less intimidating. The confrontational nature of requesting to take away a single person's status is already intimidating enough for the requester, so I definitely support any changes that make things easier for the requester. Heddy (talk) 00:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
2. Odd (Talk) 15:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
3. I support all the changes proposed here, especially in regards to the loophole. GloverMist (talk) 21:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
4. WoomyGirl85 (talk) 02:32, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
5.  GX_64 (talk)  02:32, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
6. -Random 03:10, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
7. All of these changes are great additions to the policy. The closing of the loophole is especially needed. I support the policy overhaul. FancyRat 18:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
8. Slate Talk Contribs 22:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
9. Rassicas {Talk} {Contribs} 06:25, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
10. ℂ𝕝𝕒𝕣𝕚𝕟𝕖𝕥.𝕠𝕔𝕥𝕠 (ℙ𝕣𝕒𝕥𝕥𝕝𝕖) 21:01, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
11. Yoshifan52 (talk) 01:05, 5 August 2023 (UTC)