Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-1251315-20150608231255/@comment-1251315-20150609102257

Dantman wrote: When was this? I've never argued in favour of expiring sysop rights. Are you talking about the time you overreacted that time WindStar was busy and wasn't as active? If not, than anything I said that you might have misread was probably me just trying to get you to stop pestering me about it. No, it wasn't then. Think it was not long after I was made a forum operator and we were chatting on chat about something. But it was ages ago and I obviously dont' have a record of it, but I recall it being stated.

I said we do cherry pick Wikipedia policies. Explicit on the "cherry pick". As in here and there we use a small handful of Wikipedia policies as either a base or a guide full of good rationales. We don't blanket rely on Wikipedia as the base for all our policies. And every now and then when a user pops up suggesting something that doesn't fit the wiki I may quote a Wikipedia policy or essay not because "it's Wikipedia!!!" (that would be an authority fallacy), but because the Wikipedia policy has good relevant rationales or it embodies the same wiki way or wiki spirit we follow. eg: Wikipedia's "Wikipedia is not a democracy" is a good way to get some people to understand that consensus is not a voting system and consensus based wikis like ours are not democracies or based on majority rule. I guess. But to be fair, a lot of wiki's generally tend to remove sysops that have been gone for about a year (with a consensus of course) and that's what this thread is about: if the community supports removing the rights from Simant, then the communities will should be heard. And as I said, the duties that Simant carried out are already covered by at least 3 people (you, UltimateSupreme and Snapper2) and I don't recall him deleting pages or blocking users on a regular basis.

Of course, if Simant "does" choose to return and become active, then this thread is moot, but I don't see that happening.