Forum:Reorder Admins on Discord

From Meta Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Reorder Admins on Discord

So, there's been plenty of memery about regarding how Old School admins are oppressed by the RuneScape admins on discord, and with the larger number, there are times in the day where the entire category is buried under pink names (and even some of those get cut off). This thread is a proposal to redirect the names on the page, as there's some truth to the memes. There are a couple of options before us:

  1. RSC
    RSW
    OSW

This first order would put the admins in chronological order of the games.

  1. OSW
    <RSW
    RSC

This next order would put the games in order of their popularity, according to the traffic to the wikis.

  1. RSW
    OSW
    RSC

This is the current order, and reflects dated traffic flows.

Discussion[edit source]

Support OSW first - Badassiel 06:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Support OSW first - OSW, RSW, PTBR, RSC, Meta Choppe| t 06:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Porque no los dos - Have all three under one unpingable "Admin" category, but still have distinct colours for each wiki (I don't care about the hierarchy, i.e. what colour an OSRS+RS3 admin would have). This would still cut down the size of the sidebar (even more actually).

Also, what exactly is the "truth behind the memery"? I don't see why the order should reflect which game is more popular. Doesn't RS3 wiki have more regular editors? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Haidro (talk) 07:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Also I think I'd support OSRS+RS3 admins having the RS3 colour because most dual admins are prominently rs3 admins. Two exceptions I can think of is Spine (but irrelevant since the green bureaucrat will override) and Cook. If you really care, you could create a "osrs wiki admin colour" role that's above the hierarchy and give it to the dual admins that want it, but it gets a little messy. Haidro (talk) 09:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Support for the Haidro option - While I'm very happy about the option of RSC up top I don't think it would make any sense. Switching OSRS and RS3 admin positions in Discord doesn't solve the problem, but moves the problem: RS3 admins will be "surpressed" by OSRS admins, given that quite some RS3 admins are actually admins on the OSRS wiki as well. By combining both RS3 admins and OSRS (and the pt-br and us few and lonely RSC) admins in the same "admin" category the problem is effectively solved, creating a better world for... everyone? Zorak PlorakTalk the RuneScape Classic lover 08:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Support for the Haidro option - Per Zorak Plorak. Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) 08:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Support for the Haidro option - Also note that editor and more specifically discord traffic is more relevant than visitors to the wiki. Elessar2 (talk) 09:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Support Haidro - All admins should be under one overarching role on the sidebar, but have individual roles & colours that can be pinged if necessary. Not rocket science. jayden 10:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Support - Per Haidro. I believe putting all Wiki admins in the same category would bring more transparency and removing that "hierachy" stigma. Another suggestion is to put Crats on a separate category tho. Gugu (Talk) 18:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't really see an issue with the current order and no one has really been able to provide solid evidence of this being a genuine problem. It doesn't seem worthwhile spending energy on something so trivial.

Merging the admin groups together is in fact reverting the change made some time ago to make it easier to find admins for each wiki. I don't see a benefit to merging everyone together and making it harder for editors get in contact with their friendly neighborhood admins. cqm talk 18:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Comment - Like cqm (and others in Discord) said, I don't think that it makes it easier for end users if we merge the admins. Even if we have an unpingable admin role that forces you to pick RS/OSRS/C/PT-BR admins, a common use case is finding a single admin from one of these groups to ping, which is almost certainly harder if we merge lists. I'm also not convinced that any wiki in particular should be at the top of the list.

That said, I do think that it is a bit annoying that OS admins often don't even show up in the sidebar without scrolling down depending on screen size. While this might seem like a trivial issue that can be solved by scrolling down, it does kind of rub me the wrong way that this is not helped by the fact that RS wiki has a fair number of admin roles in Discord that, at least to me, do not appear particularly active in wiki-rs or the Discord at all. It seems like culling this list a bit would not only be helpful in alleviating the problem addressed in this thread, but would also be more helpful for regular users looking for an active admin to ping. This is also why I'm hesitant to support moving a different group of wiki admins to the top of the list. If OS wiki gets moved to the top, who's to say that further down the line there aren't a bunch of inactive admins clogging up the list? Then we have the same problem as we do now. Considering that several (3+) admins currently grouped under RS wiki admins would be switched to whatever the top group is, this would mean that the new top list would also have more people than it does now. For example, if OS currently lists X active admins and is moved to the top, it should be noted that there will be more than X admins listed under the OS admin role after moving when accounting for these multi-role admins who get dragged into the top role.

A possible solution could be to make new roles for inactive or rarely active admins and move this below the lists of active admins for all wikis. The downside would be that there would be role bloat, but removing the admin role from someone entirely would probably do more harm than good in some cases. Andmcadams (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for closure - A similar thread titled Breaking the glass ceiling has already been passed and our chief and king BigDiesel2m has yet to implement the changes proposed in that thread!!!! -- SpineTalk 20:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - Everything on this thread either creates further problems or doesn't solve existing ones. Talk-to Kelsey 01:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Could you clarify how a reorder of the more relevant (in every way except for amount of regular editors (which are less likely to need admin help)) being moved to the top to be more easily visible doesn't solve the existing issue of OSW admins being objectively harder to find than RSW admins despite having more players, more discussion on discord, more role pings, more vandalism, and more wiki traffic? A reorder seems to solve that issue without causing any more issues that I can see. I agree that Haidro's suggestion obviously doesn't solve any issues here and definitely causes even more issues, but I don't see how you could say a simple logical reorder doesn't solve any issues or that it causes any more. zTUG5mD.png Crow 653  03:46, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Support most active wiki's admins on top - I think that whichever wiki has the most traffic should be on top. Objectively, the higher traffic wiki would see more users drawn to Discord and those users might be searching for an admin of that respective wiki. I would rather us tailor to the community than not in this regard. --Legaia2Pla · ʟ · 17:53, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Support OSW -> RSW -> PT-BR -> RSC - Most active wiki makes the most logical sense to me as new editors are most likely to need help from admins of their respective wiki.

As a sidenote, Haidro's proposal doesn't seem to make any sense or solve any issues, in fact it seems to mainly just cause more issues as the point of even having admins visible is so that users will be able to easily find help from admins. Combining the admins just makes it objectively more difficult for users to find admins for the wiki they're editing. There's no benefit in that. zTUG5mD.png Crow 653  16:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Oppose Everything, Alternative Suggestion

  1. Keeping Discord roles separate by Wiki make the most sense, as it allows the user to either page all admins or to find an admin for a specific wiki, so oppose merging the roles.
  1. Arguing about which wiki should be on top is arguing from a sense of superiority, or from felt oppression, and is at most a half second scroll through the admins. If we switch to OSW on top, we may have another thread in a year talking about RSW oppression, or inevitably RSC/PT-BR oppression when their user activity spikes and overtakes both OSW and RSW (patiently waiting for this day to come).

Alternate proposal - Rotations

We have four wikis. Rotate the top wiki and wiki order equally between the four wikis. Automate the switch every month, and alternate between PT-BR, RSC, OSW, and RSW on top every month. There are twelve months in a year, so each wiki can have an equal number each year. Or, base it on the number of seats on the board as a percentage if you think that's more fair. The ultimate point is, don't have minor bits of embedded favoritism for any wiki on the Discord server, because it will almost certainly be challenged again in the future. We are all Gloop together, no matter the wiki. Aescopalus 16:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Rotating between them is a stupid idea, a waste of time coding a bot to do, and causes even more confusion to people when the order is constantly changing. jayden 16:30, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Support Haidro's proposal - one big admin group but keep the different colours for admins of each wiki (even better - give more distinctive colours to rsw/osrs) and make each wiki admin group have a different ping for it. We could also update #welcome to give more Discord specific info e.g. what different channels are for (i.e. you can get editing help in the relevant wiki's channel)/what different role are (i.e. here are admins of x wiki if you need help from an admin). IsobelJ (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Oppose a large group - I think this proposal seems good at first glance but actually causes way more problems than we currently have. Putting everyone in the same group in the name of equality (or whatever) just makes it harder to look at the user list and figure out what online person to ping about your issue. ʞooɔ 19:03, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

What is the use case that people, who are new to Discord, need to ping an individual? Why would it be hard? Haidro (talk) 21:39, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
They are looking for an admin or authority to talk to about something on the wiki, but (rightly) are smart enough not to ping the entire group. This happens quite frequently. With your proposal, it becomes impossible without clicking individual users to figure out if they are from the right wiki. ʞooɔ 21:50, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Fair point. However, I do get PMs from users regarding OSRS wiki, even though I'm only an RS3 admin. We are a different Discord server in the sense that we have multiple types of admins for different things (maybe we should split the servers :) :)). But if your concern is about identifying which wiki an admin is from, then I do think the role colours for RS/OSRS admins should be a bit more distinct (yes I've seen you suggest this on Discord). Haidro (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Clearer role colors would be nice, but expecting that to be a replacement for role labels on the sidebar is quite a stretch. ʞooɔ 23:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Why are you specifying new to Discord? I'm sure we have a large number of people coming to our Discord server who have been on other servers, and may understand etiquette surrounding pinging entire groups, and instead pick an individual to PM. I have gotten plenty of directed PMs from people since I'm relatively close to the top of the list. Christine 21:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I don't think experienced Discord users have trouble pinging/PMing specific users from a list of admins. Haidro (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I think the argument is that people who are familiar with Discord in general, but not deeply familiar with our specific community members, would be worse off with a general "admins" category since they wouldn't know who the specific users are. ʞooɔ 23:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
A single "admin" grouping would be ambiguous; I agree that we shouldn't have it. --Legaia2Pla · ʟ · 14:52, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - As per Kelsey RobbotRS 20:57, 14 November 2020 (UTC)