On 3/31/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
The two year version is more likely to know why
we are where we are
now. Admins who don't know this tend to cause interesting problems.
This can also be the case with returning admins. There are other
differences that are also likely to exist.
Could a one month editor not be a good admin? If they could, then why
do we have such prejudice against the idea?
A one-month editor could be a good admin. What a minimum time rule
really tests is patience. Is he willing to stick around when things get
tedious. If he goes away when he doesn't get made a sysop right away
maybe he wasn't meant to be one.
Has anyone done a statistical analysis of the day-by-day contributions
of editors and graphed their number of edits over perhaps the first 100
days after they registe?. Does boredom hit suddenly or do the edits
gradually diminish?
Ec
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: