Talk:Volunteer Response Team/Archives/2018
|Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2018, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.|
OTRS Policy not followed at all by admins
In two different places, the policy states that OTRS users may not be submitted to activity policy in case of
4 Role accounts
Certain subsets of Wikimedia users are using OTRS as part of their on-wiki duties. Such groups include Stewards, Wiki Loves Monuments, users with "oversight" rights on projects utilizing OTRS to process requests, etc. These users:
- Will retain access for the tenure of their on-wiki role(s) requiring access.
- Will not be subject to Activity policy standards with regards to the queues that they require access.
- Will be subject to the Activity policy with regards to non-role related queues.
- Will receive OTRS-wiki accounts.
Occasionally it will be necessary for users to acquire access to OTRS and/or its resources for a temporary purpose or project. Such reasons could be for special events, coordination of the Wikimania or other convention-related queues, etc. Agents in this category:
- Will retain access to OTRS for the duration of their project (a time-frame should be predetermined).
- Will receive access to only those resources (wiki, mailing lists, etc.) necessary for completion of their project.
So... I have had an OTRS account for years. A wiki account for years. At some point, I was quite active. Then less and less. But I had opened three files under my supervision for Wiki Loves Africa (ran 4 years already).
Alas, in spite of pointing out to the need to retain the account, my account to OTRS has been deactivated. And my account to the OTRS wiki has been cancelled as well.
What is exactly the point of having a policy which is blatantly not followed ?
- Dear Anthere, your questions cannot be answered without sharing private information, so I'd suggest you contact OTRS admins directly by e-mail. Thank you. --Krd 05:13, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
- A very easy way to dig the fact the OTRS policy is not being respected by admins. Sad. Anthere (talk) 11:54, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
- From a procedure point of view it certainly appears that the role accounts exclusion from the activity policy is not followed. For example, I occasionally receive inactivity "warnings" despite being a Steward. Maybe they are relying on you to tell them that you have a role account when you get an inactivity notice - which isn't unreasonable. QuiteUnusual (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
- It was known. I was the one who requested the opening of those queues on OTRS wiki several years ago. And it was discussed in September 2017 on the OTRS wiki as well when they removed me from the "activity checked" queues.
- I am ready to accept the fact that it was an error to remove me this January without any warning whatsoever, by an OTRS admin who did not check, either who created the queues in the first place, nor the discussion on my talk page of last September 2017 where I asked to keep access to those. I do not think it was done in bad faith. It certainly was an error. What escape me is why the refusal to acknowledge this, and the fact that the admin is clearly not up-to-speed with the policy. Anthere (talk)
- No commenting further this way, sorry. Whenever you like talk constructively, you will be welcome. --Krd 17:01, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
- Do not discuss if you do not feel like doing it. I have no idea whether you did the removal or did not anyway. For all I know, it can be you or someone else. It does not matter and I know that OTRS admin are anonymous so I will not be told who did it. I do not ask for that. I do not care.
What I care is different. I will repeat here publicly what I asked by email. That :
- all OTRS admin be invited to read again the policy as obviously, some points were missed by some of them. I do not blame them for not knowing. That can happen, no one is perfect. But if a community member outline that there IS a policy and that the policy is not known and applied by admin, then it may be a good move to actually issue a reminder of what the policy exactly includes. Yes ?
- I also asked that a message be send to users when their accounts are deactivated (OTRS and wiki). It is currently not in the policy. Perhaps it would be a good idea to add it ? It can be useful to the user to be informed...
- Last, I asked that the email addresses associated to the WLA queues be deactivated. There is no one left over there to answer them. Those queues were never really active anyway. But the last message sent by a jury member early 2018 got unanswered for a full month because there is NO AGENT left to do so. That is very embarrassing. So it seems frankly best to avoid that people believe they will get their emails read by someone when there is no one there.
I think those three requests are perfectly reasonable. I see no reason why they would not be addressed because it would require sharing private information.
- The policy change can be done here without any need to reveal private info.
- The call for OTRS admin to read carefully the policy can be done on the OTRS mailing list without any need to reveal private information.
- I am not sure how the deactivation of the WLA mails would require sharing private information... I was the one who requested the creation of those 4 years ago. The request was made on OTRS wiki (I can not give you the link since I can't see that wiki any more, but I know I did it following the proper procedure so it should be somewhere in the page where queues are requested). I know I asked who would be okay to help on those queues. The list of those people is available here. I have no idea whether Bachounda is still an active agent. He could be asked. I know for a fact that Isla is not. That leaves User:Nkansahrexford (last edit a year ago ). I have no memory more agents were added to those queues in the following years. 2015, 2016, 2017.
- if the emails can not be deactivated, please ask help from a current WLx agent so that they monitor in case and forward us the email. I removed references to OTRS emails on Commons where it made sense. I can't do so easily in other places. thanks. Anthere (talk) 17:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Handling tickets about yourself
Is there some recommendation for OTRS volunteers, e.g. in the info-* queues, on whether to response to tickets about themselves? E.g. user writes to a queue for a "clarification" on an action by user John Doe; the very same user John Doe replies. Nemo 14:37, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
- In the info queue generally it's not a problem, because the agent should know the issue well. --Ruthven (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Unsuitable OTRS Volunteer?
Tea House/ Help Desk Exp Helpful?
- I suggest getting more editing experience first. Start contributing content and see what happens with it, engage in talk page discussions, etc., that's the most basic wiki experience. Then maybe some administrative tasks that suit your interests, and so on. — Yerpo Eh? 07:13, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Volunteer September 2018
Request for support - 2019 Community Wishlist Survey
The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech Team hosts an annual survey where any Wikimedia community member may make a small request for technical development of the Wikimedia projects. This year community members made 212 proposals. From November 16-30 there is voting at Community Wishlist Survey 2019. The Community Tech Team will develop the top 10 proposals in 2019 to present them by the end of the year. Vote now! Also plan your wishes for the next year.
This survey encourages community advertising and canvassing. Here are the OTRS-related proposals. If anyone sees others of interest then list them below.
- from bluerasberry - Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Editing/Easy talk page posts by email
- from Anachronist - Community_Wishlist_Survey_2019/Editing/Route users through knowledgebase before contacting OTRS
Please support by clicking "support"!