QUOTE(UserB @ Mon 14th July 2008, 10:37am)
Not everything scales well. Ruling by general consensus works great for a team of 5. It works very poorly for a discussion with 500 people offering opinions.
Sure this would scale well. Look:
Based on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suc...andidacies#2008* June: 554 supports on 8 successful, 69.25 avg
* May: 1451 supports on 18 successful, 80.61 avg
* April: 1608 supports on 16 successful, 100.5 avg
* Total: 3613 supports on 42 successful, 86.02 avg
* 55% of 86.02 = 47.31 for April-June 08.
Why not base it on a rolling average of the preceding average supports for the past 3-6 months? That way everyone is on the same exact standards, fairly. Took less than 3 minutes to pull these with a calculator. Do the same for arbs, cats and everyone else.
So, you would need a dead minimum of 47 to qualify the recall and then it would need to finish passing above that over 55%. You would need a substantial number of people calling for the recall. Limit the recall to users with x edits/tenure like RFAR voting (heck, just use the same exact metrics) and that's pretty fair and scalable then. Frighteningly so. The ratio needed would update each time and if you're feeling frisky you can adjust the 55% along the axis of the support percentages that are average out over the given months. It would be kids stuff for a bot writer to draft this and the super simple numbers to community recall/deadmin would constantly be current with what the community standards are to sysop in the first place.
Summary...
Based on what Amerique and Until 1=2 said at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ame...ommunity_recall it would require a minimum of 75% support on a qualified user recall to have it pass, like a regular RFA. So if I was an admin TODAY, it would require with my slight tweak a minimum of 47 plus established users (using the standards on who gets to vote for Arbcom elections) to say "Root sucks" within 7 days, and then it would require a finished passing percentage of 75% of those same established users for me to lose my bit. It would be virtually impossible for any lightweight, trivial, or frivilous recall to succeed. No cabal anywhere is that powerful in 2008 on Wikipedia. Not even remotely close.
This post has been edited by Rootology: