Volunteer Response Team/Volunteering

Volunteer Response Team/Volunteering/Header

Dharmadhyaksha

• languages you can reply in: English-3, Hindi-3, and Marathi-N
• your most active user talk page(s): on English Wikipedia
• Email sent: Yes
• Queues you would like access to: info-en, Permissions, wm-in

I'd like to help out on OTRS especially reviewing emails related to Commons. I am active on English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. My work has mostly been on removing vandals, tagging copyrighted images, content addition, taking part in general discussions, etc. I have rollbacker rights on en-wiki and license reviewer rights on Commons. Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 14:36, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

User:Bjelleklang

• Languages: Norwegian-n, English-3, Swedish-1 and Danish-1
• Talkpage: en.wiki
• Email sent: Yes
• Queues: info-en, info-no

I'd like to help out on OTRS, primarily with (new) user assistance/support. I've been helping out in #wikipedia-en-help for several years (despite not being very active on Wikipedia), lately also helping out with article reviews and some unblock applications. I have admin rights on the english Wikipedia. Bjelleklang -- talk 21:37, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure you meant to ask for access to the Sicilian queue (scn is sicilian)? :D Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 12:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Turned out to be correct, according to OTRS#Info info-scn is scandinavian, not Sicilian :) Bjelleklang -- talk 12:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

So bizarre. /me stares at the OTRS admins. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 12:58, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

That was actually a mistake...info-scn is indeed for Sicilian. I've updated the other page. Rjd0060 (talk) 13:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

User:slav4

• Languages: Hebrew-n, English-3
• Talkpage: he.wiki
• Email sent: Yes
• Queues: info-he, permissions-he

I'd like to help out on OTRS, especially uploading approvals of holders' rights of images which are sent by an e-mail. I am writing at the Hebrew-Wikipedia, and till today I uploaded over 250 articles. I also upload lot of pictures to the Wikimedia Commons. At the Hebrew Wikipedia, I have Bureaucrat permissions.

User:Dennis Brown

• languages you can reply in: English
• your most active user talk page(s): en.wiki
• Email sent: Yes
• Queues you would like access to: info-en, Permissions, Photosubmissions

Looking to help as I'm a seasoned editor with a high level of experience in personal dispute resolution both onwiki and in the real world. Admin on the the English Wikipedia since 4/12, over 30k edits, active for years, founded Wikiproject Editor Retention[1], work regularly at SPI and ANI and have a reputation for being able to handle the most difficult of situations. Very familiar with assisting new editors and dealing with delicate situations. Familiar with copyright issues regarding photos via work at Commons and enwp. Dennis Brown (talk) 14:38, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Just a quick note to say that I do believe that Dennis would make an excellent OTRS volunteer, he has the temperment that is needed for dealing with difficult situations, has a clear understanding of how best to calm down an upset individual and convey useful information towards them. He would be, without a doubt, an asset to the OTRS team. Worm^TT 14:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Echo what Worm had to say on this. -- KTC (talk) 17:01, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Support would be a good asset to the team and a good info-en (f) respondent down the road. --Rschen7754 17:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

No issues whatsoever, full support for a user that will make an excellent OTRS agent. Thehelpfulone 19:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Support only if he promises to answer requests posted here. (Just kidding) Dharmadhyaksha (talk) 07:51, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Support Wonderful user. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Oppose. In conversations with Dennis I've picked up that, at least in relation to adminship, he considers it his role to go beyond rules and community norms when those rules and norms do not allow for a solution that achieves what he thinks is Right. This is an excellent thing to have in a Supreme Court justice or a Member of Parliament; it is a very dangerous thing to have in an administrator, or an OTRSer. I cannot, in all confidence, support the extension of his rights to a role that depends on balancing user and complainant expectations and policies so finely. Ironholds (talk) 12:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm not really sure how this candidate's views on adminship affect his ability to respond to tickets in a neutral and reliable way. Mind explaining? Ajraddatz (Talk) 13:24, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

They might not, necessarily - but it's not exactly a stretch to say that someone who takes that attitude with one position of power and pseudo-authority is unlikely to have a role-specific moral code; it will be a wider attitude. Ironholds (talk) 15:41, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

That is an interesting observation, although I don't remember any conversation that would lead to that conclusion. Most of my work [2] [3] tried to put more "power" in the hands of individual editors and less in the hands of admin, including a call for higher accountability for admin. I respect your opinion, and would sincerely welcome a discussion on that idea at a more appropriate venue as I think your impression of me is different than the reality. Dennis Brown (talk) 19:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

• mea culpa; it was not a conversation but my random browsing :). Your comment here of "I've always enjoyed working at the boundaries of policy, getting a little creative in my solutions." is the thing that sets alarm bells ringing. We don't need OTRS volunteers who take that attitude with what can be a highly delicate field where policies have real rationales. Ironholds (talk) 01:31, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

  And that is a perfectly legitimate concern and diff to back up your concerns. When you combine that with my actual activities, which are primarily focused on Editor Retention, the meaning comes more into focus. In this case, my "stretching the rules" was to have Dr. Blofeld's 1000 DYK mentioned as a DYK on the front page, which Jimbo Wales also agreed with, and it was a vote, not a unilateral action. My reaching towards the boundaries has only been in unblocking (always with consultation of the blocking admin), giving second changes to problem editors, trying to not block people, and other editor retention areas. I will admit, I do not instinctively block someone for 7RR, I instinctively full protect the page. I close stuff at ANI and move it onto the problem editor's talk page when they need education instead of sanctions, sometimes rather boldly. I do not deny this. Unquestionably, I try to solve behavioral problems using common sense rather than policy at ANI, as I seek solutions, not justice. It is my nature to seek the most drama free solution to a problem, even if it means I do something unusual. Stepping outside of convention is not the same as stepping outside of policy, however. I have never blocked anyone out of a false sense of justice, abused the tools, or done anything sneaky. The biggest complaint I get is for not blocking soon or often enough, ask other admin that work ANI. I'm human, have plenty of flaws, and make mistakes, but I am not under any illusion that I am above policy, and I'm confident that if you looked deeper you would agree. I get it that you don't click with me on a personal level, and you have better things to do than monitor my activities, but you wouldn't find anything abusive if you did. Ask those that do see me daily. Look at my diffs, I work the most contentious areas on enwp, trying to calm them down, it is easy to see what I really do. Again, I would be happy to answer any question on any specific action(s) I've ever made, on my talk page, the same as I do for everyone else. Sorry to take up so much space, but I felt you really have a major misconception of who I am. Dennis Brown (talk) 03:19, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

  I'm sorry, but your words don't match up with your actions. here, for example, and the thread it relates to, you appealed a bureaucrat decision you disagreed with to arbcom (of all places). Doing so split the community and caused a heck of a lot of drama surrounding the resysopping decision and the case. You may truly believe, in your heart of hearts, that you care about reducing drama and are built around low-drama solutions rather than justice. But your actions there, and your statement that "I can't just walk away when I think something is a real problem, I'm not built that way", speak differently: they speak of someone ultimately motivated by what they feel is Right in their relativist morality, and compulsed to step in and do something when they feel that the decision is not Right, regardless of drama or consequences. Such a person should not be handling OTRS tickets, many of which, once you strip out the template replies and crud, are highly sensitive and speak of long-standing issues between what the outside world would consider optimal and the attitude editors would take. I cannot, in all confidence, trust that you will handle those appropriately - either doing right by the editors, doing right by the policies, or doing right by the complainant. All I can trust is that you'll do right by yourself. Ironholds (talk) 03:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

  On the contrary, filing at Arb was using the process, not working outside of it. This case was filed because a former admin who left under a cloud requested his admin bit be returned in the middle of an edit war with an editor, Dr. Blofeld. It was the first and only time I have ever filed an Arb case. After the admin was resysopped, Dr. Blofeld put up retired banners, and it took a lot of time and email to bring him back. This wasn't about me, Oliver, it was about editor retention: a former admin that left after abusing the tools and being called out for it at ANI, and Dr. Blofeld, the 9th most active editor at enwp with 450,000 edits, including 1000 DYKs, plus many FAs and GAs. The Crats said that they were powerless to refuse and had already restored the admin bit. There was no question that he had previously abused his tools, even he admits that now. Once Polarscribe/FCYTravis gave up his admin bit, I instantly withdrew the case [4]. In the aftermath, a 24 hour waiting period was implemented, a 3year/1year rule to force a new RFA was put in place, Crats now have clearer authority to delay resysoping if there are outstanding issues, all unquestionably stemming from the concerns around this case. I would do it differently now, but I didn't do anything I'm ashamed of. I'm not a warrior, nor a judge and haven't forced my vision of Right™ on anyone. I might joke about the borders of policy with Malleus, but my actions were here were consistent with policy, as only Arbs can decide desysop issues. Even in this "worst case" example, I was calm and polite and followed policy, perhaps too rigidly if anything. Besides, OTRS is not enwp, the structure is more rigid and the rules appear more clearly defined. My personal objective is having another outlet to help people, and I understand the policies here are not the same and require a more strict and narrow interpretation by those who volunteer. I'm confident that I can comply with the expectations, take criticisms on board, and know to stay within my own limits, fully understanding that this is not enwp. Dennis Brown (talk) 14:13, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd say the fundamental thing is knowing what OTRS is and isn't. After you toss the spam, a good 20% of info-en(l) is trying to ask us questions that should go to the ref desk or trying to ask us if we have contact details for celebs. Another 20% are people trying to do an end-run around on-wiki processes. The key here is that you have to direct them to on-wiki processes as OTRS is not a place to forum shop. And another 20% is people who think that Wikipedia is Facebook and want a profile. Of course you usually say no. 20% are sensitive tickets, from celebs or companies, and this is where I think you could be helpful; however you don't get access until you get info-en(f). (I don't have that yet, and happily so). 15% are people who are angry for one reason or another and we have to use the rule of diminishing replies or they will never give up. And 5% are other random questions.

So I'd say the main issue is knowing when we don't respond to tickets, and observing those rules. --Rschen7754 public (talk) 01:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)