Talk:Global message delivery/Access list

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Please add me to global message delivery access list[edit]

Propose the removal of Nemo_bis[edit]

Nemo_bis started a discussion about a global ban of a user, and then has undertaken a global message delivery without obvious further discussion. This looks to me an abuse of the purpose of the bot, and an abuse of the privilege of the bot. It is too close to a conflict of interest and one would hope that any use of the bot would have a level of conversation with a wider audience, or a level of self-reflection that would get someone else to undertake the notification. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:46, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he should have used a script. I will publish a JavaScript in the near future that will do the same, just under the user account that is running it.
On the other hand, please point to a policy that was violated. -- Rillke (talk) 14:26, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The policy at Global bans requires notifications to communities where a user was active, for apparent reasons (otherwise the proposal is even invalid). So this seems to me to be a legitimate usage of the bot. It doesn't matter much if one sends it manually or through this bot. --MF-W 19:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per the policy, I/it was required to send the notifications. Making 70 edits manually is no big deal if for whatever reason the bot is not considered the appropriate tool for mandatory notifications, but this is not stated or implied anywhere; just let me (and others) know if this is the conclusion. --Nemo 13:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC) P.s.: If the problem is in the text of the notification, however, that's another matter. I hope it was ok, it consisted only of a link and a quotation from the policy to explain why the link was posted.[reply]
I received a lot of email pings about this system. He did not meet the criteria, which means that he spammed me quite a bit. He knew it would happen, and he knew that it would be harassing. This was not a legitimate use because he did not meet the criteria. It is obvious that there should be obvious certification before a neutral person activates it. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:07, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]