AVID:Requests for Comment/Discontinue use of the Rollbacker role: Difference between revisions
From the Audiovisual Identity Database, the motion graphics museum
Content deleted Content added
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
===Support=== |
===Support=== |
||
#{{Support}} most people would probably go for mod rather than rollback. ''[[User:Logohub|<span style="font-size: 120%;"><span style="font-family:'serif';">Logohub</span></span>]]'' ([[User talk:Logohub|talk]]) 06:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC) |
#{{Support}} most people would probably go for mod rather than rollback. ''[[User:Logohub|<span style="font-size: 120%;"><span style="font-family:'serif';">Logohub</span></span>]]'' ([[User talk:Logohub|talk]]) 06:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC) |
||
#{{Support}} this role is useless [[User:ForcedExcess26|ForcedExcess26]] ([[User talk:ForcedExcess26|talk]]) 08:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
===Abstain=== |
===Abstain=== |
||
Revision as of 08:01, 14 April 2023
Discontinue use of the Rollbacker role
With the introduction of the Moderator role, having a role solely for rollbacking seems to be mostly useless, as most people would be more likely to apply for moderator instead. With this in mind, I think keeping the role in use would be a waste, as to me, it's clear nobody is going to use it. What do you all think? 
(Lets chat!) 05:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Support
Support most people would probably go for mod rather than rollback. Logohub (talk) 06:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC)- Support this role is useless ForcedExcess26 (talk) 08:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
