On 4/13/07, gjzilla(a)gmail.com <gjzilla(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/13/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Wikipedia is community based. This is something
that should be
> embraced rather than opposed.
>
> Additionally the odds of any such committee being able to process RFAs
> at the pace required is minimal.
I didn't suggest this as a "replacement" for RFA. That would still be
there in all its glory (or brokenness) and work just as it does now.
It would be another way of picking admins, hence the term "Plan B".
I don't think this should be rejected *out of
hand*. However, who
would pick them? That would probably be a dealbreaker.
It might be easier to pick them if RFA still existed. It just might be
a case where the "bureastewards" or a group of swamped admins say
"hey, we could use just a few more admins then are currently getting
through RFA, let's submit a few good people to "Plan B".
I do think that one thing that "Plan B" should not be used for is to
make someone admin who has failed his RFA. That would look "cabalish".