RB (Rollback)

  • Just a few: Watch over Chat, Prevent Vandalism, Inform Admins/Crats of any issues that arise, Have a say in ideas/expansions ideas, create new ideas for the wiki, Actively RPing, Contribute to Departments --~Peislandgal (talk) 00:33, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
  • I guess my "Thing" as rollback is helping newbies set up tallk-bubbles, like AJ back in the day. Rabbitty (talk) 01:20, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
  • Basically everything Peis said, plus helping out new users and regulars if they need it. Weirdo Guy (talk) 13:25, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
  • I think that right now, RB's are users who have proven that they're reliable, plan on staying on the wiki, and have shown that they have the ability to help others. They should be active RPers, and thus help involve other users, and get the RPing as well. I think those things are good and that's what the RB's are doing currently. However, I also think they should be able to have input into the expansions, have their own ideas and be able to implement them, help around the wiki by contributing behind the scenes in Dept work, and be able to deal with user issues on their own. It's this second list of things that I'm not sure we've allowed or equipped RB's to be able to do. I'm not saying they CAN'T. I'm saying that due to the wiki's power structure I'm not sure they need to or have a reason to do these things. ...and if agreed that they should be able to do these things, but can't, then maybe some changes need to be made to allow them to be able to do this. Also, RB's automatically are granted Chat moderator status currently. Is this needed or used? Should it only be granted to Admins and Bcrats, or is there a need to RB's to have it? I think right now most of MY questions and such revolve around this roll, and I'm looking forward to seeing other's input as well. However, what I put above is just my thoughts and opinions. Feel free to disagree, answer the questions I posted or have a completely different opinion of what these roles and responsibilities should be, as I would like to know if I'm wrong in any of what I posted above, in what they're currently doing, or what they should be doing. Bond_em7 (Owl Me) 13:55, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree with a lot of what the others said above. I think that RB's should have a bit more responsibilites, such as maybe running major functions (like I know how SoA ran the ball, whatever it was called?). Also, answering to Bond's question about RB's needing to have chat moderator: I think it is god that we do have it, but I hardly see any times when any administration needs to use it. As far as I can remember, we've only had to use it on one user (that truly needed it). The reason I think it's good for RB's in particular to have it is because more of the Administration is RB based, and sometimes Bcrats and Admins might not always be on to take care of the people who are misbehaving on chat. I'd really like to see that RB's (in th future) would get more oppurtunites to play larger rolls in expansions, lead major functions, or in plain, have larger responsibilites. It seems reasonable that it could be a sort of test of dedication to the wiki from the RB's, and prepare them for possible higher positions in the future. Colin687 05:11, June 22, 2013 (UTC) 
  • A little late, but I'll still post a few points. I agree with most of the above. I think that rollbacks should have the chat moderator status, as a lot of our rollbacks cover time zones that the admins and bureaucrats are not in. Also, I think the chat mod is part of the privelage. If its misused, it can be removed without a full demotion, and it gives a sense of authority, otherwise rollbacks look equal to regulars. Strictly speaking, the position as a rollback is to watch the wiki for vandalism, and "rollback" edits that are performed by vandals. However, I believe that rollbacks should have input into the expansions. The big thing is I feel we currently do not give the tools to our rollbacks to come up with ideas for the wiki. I think running events should be left to the leaders of the department that's involved in the event, but rollbacks should be able to have input. Feel free to disagree. This is how I see the rollbacks. Head of Ravenclaw   (Send me an Owl!)
  • I want there to be more responsibilities to the RB's. I'm not nescisarilly sure now what those responsibilites would be, but I strongly feel that we should definately let the RB's have a bit more to do with some of the major things of the wiki. Colin687 05:45, August 6, 2013 (UTC)


  • Right now Admins are expected to RP, and also attend Department meetings, give input, and help their Department Leader in implementing the duties of the given department. Most Admins also have specific jobs or responsibilities they have been given to help keep parts of the wiki running. Some examples are Minister of Magic, Hogwarts Headmaster (or Deputy as the case currently is, though an admin could be Headmaster as well), or Head of the Order of the Phoenix. They also help do routine maintenance work around the wiki, improving upon pages, and helping new users get their talk bubbles, character pages etc. set up. Also they are willing to help out when needed, from GMing to helping with event etc. They also have the ability to ban trolls or other problematic users, though should get other's input before taking drastic action. I think that covers what they currently do. However, I have recently been thinking about it, and I think that Admins should all have specific jobs and responsibilities. So for example, I was thinking of placing a specific admin in charge of St. Mungo's Hospital for Magical Maladies and Injuries and having them ensure there's healers there, and letting the Ministry know when more are needed, and that RPing there happens when needed, and a healer is available to do the necessary RPs. That doesn't mean they would have to do all the Healing RP's themselves, just ensure somebody does it. Are there other duties Admins should have, or duties they have that they shouldn't? Are there other places on the wiki like St. Mungos that would do better with an active admin ensuring it runs smoothly? What's above is just my opinion, so feel free to comment or answer what I put as you see it. Bond_em7 (Owl Me) 14:03, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
  • The way I see it, is that Headmaster and Deputy Headmaster and other in character positions shouldn't be limited to admins. Sure, admins are likely to be more active, but there's definitely some reliable regular users. I'm not saying an admin can't be in these positions, I just disagree with limiting them completely. Otherwise, it may limit regular users ability to become more involved in the wiki. Perhaps maybe some important positions shouldn't be limited to strictly one person, but a group of people. Maybe the headmaster is an administration ran character. Just something to think about, and I'm not saying I like this idea. I agree with admins helping new users, maintenance, between term resets, and other little things. The one big thing is that I believe admins should have every right to warn and block accordingly. (Which is documented using the reporting system) I think that placing admins to supervise (as an OOC) that IC jobs get done is a good idea, but I don't agree with limiting head healers to just admins. Head of Ravenclaw   (Send me an Owl!)


  • Act as a guide/moderator in meetings, Actively listen to concerns/ideas from other wiki members, Inform wiki members of decisions made at Bcrat meetings, Involve Admins in decision making, Actively RPing, Delegating duties to Admins --~Peislandgal (talk) 00:36, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
  • I think Peis put a good overall description, but I'll expand a little more. I think that the Bcrats currently run their department meetings, and try to attend others so they know what's going on around the wiki. I guess I see that as the Bcrat's primary job:knowing what's going on around the wiki. I think we should know when we get new users, and try to help them, know when people don't get along so we can prevent conflicts, and know when people are having RL issues and won't be around, so that way we can fill in the gaps. Bcrats are the Department Heads, and so the duties and responsibilities of their department falls on their shoulders, so if something isn't being done, it ultimately falls on a Bcrat for that. They delegate responsibilities from the department to admins or RB's to try to make sure their department is doing what it needs to. Major changes to the wiki to improve it or fix problems are determined by the Bcrats, and it's the Bcrats responsibility to ensure that the wiki works (that RPing works, new users can create characters and RP, there are places to RP and exciting things to RP and do on the wiki). It's also the Bcrats responsibility to try to promote the wiki and gain new users. I think that Bcrats should listen to the userbase and try to make the changes that are wanted or needed (assuming it won't harm the wiki). They also should have the power to get rid problematic users (with input from others) and the wisdom to know when it's needed, or when someone's just having a bad day, or just needs a warning. I also feel that all Bcrats should be actively RPing at least one character, as leadership is always needed IC as well, and if a Bcrat isn't RPing, how can they really know what's going on in the world or with characters as they're not interacting IC? Personally I think each Bcrat SHOULD have a character to RP at Hogwarts, but I understand the amount of responsibility and time the Bcrats put into the wiki may mean that's not always possible. the Bcrats have too much power (given all that they're expected to do)? Should some of their responsibilities from above be moved to the Admins? Are there other things I missed? Are there other things the Bcrats should be doing (in addition to the above) thaat they aren't now? ARE they doing all of the above now, or are things falling through the cracks? The above is just my thoughts on what the Bcrats are currently doing, and should be doing, but it's just my opinion. Feel free to agree or disagree or post on the questions I have about this. I look forward to seeing what everyone else thinks. Bond_em7 (Owl Me) 14:20, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
  • I fully agree. The one thing I think is bureaucrats need to be open. When there are bureaucrat meetings, I think concerns/issues/suggestions/comments from the username should be brought up. Then, after the meeting, I think that what was talked about should be shared with the userbase so everyone fully understands what's going on. Maybe timelines should be created, so we know exactly when specific things are going to happen. I don't think the Crats have too much power, but I just think sometimes users with lower ranks (rb and regular users) are left out in the main event plannings. I think Peis summarized it up very to the point. The Crats don't have exception to the rules, they don't have the title of "god", and they aren't these giant dictators. They're users with a few extra buttons to make the wiki tick. Agree or disagree, this is how I see the Crats duties. Head of Ravenclaw   (Send me an Owl!)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.