Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval/Lightbot 4

Lightmouse is one of Wikipedia’s best (most sophisticated) bot operators. The project needs people with his skills and the last thing we need to be doing is making volunteers have to jump through hoop after hoop in order to offer their volunteer services. This sort of white-glove treatment is unseemly to me. Lightmouse should be (and does) listen the community as a whole. If he’s doing something that could be done better or should be done differently, he’ll do it pronto. I don’t think any bot operator should have to first get a papal dispensation from a gatekeeper and then practice his or her art while being sensitive to community input. All this fine-tooth-comb inspection, in my humble opinion, is just detritus left over from an old date-related conflict. Get over it please; the world moves on. Greg L (talk) 01:59, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

With all due respect to the good work which Anomie does with automation, I feel the above detailed questions are a heavy dose of WP:UNDUE for an experienced operator such as him and Lightmouse. I cannot help but feel Anomie would rile in severe pain if the same processus was meted out to him whenever he submits a bot application. Instead of treating Lightmouse like an untrustworthy rival and subjecting him to an enema, he should treat Lightmouse with the respect that he would himself like to be accorded. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

While respecting Greg L's and Ohconfucius's opinions, this process is not a venue for LM's allies to come in and volubly support him; rather, it's for ensuring that technical and social questions are answered in whatever details are required by the members of BAG. This is the opportunity to clear up any misgivings among members, and I expect Lightmouse will gladly respond to Anomie's queries. Tony (talk) 05:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)