[Wikipedia-l] Terms for adminship

[Phroziac]

You would probably annoy the stewards if you desysop a lot of people,
but I really don't think you'll have to desysop as many as you think.
This is a good idea, and I tried to get something similar passed on en
wiki, and it didn't work....obviously. We have 500 *active* admins, we
would have to run several re-elections all the time, constantly. So,
remember, this won't scale well.


On 9/30/05, Habj <sweetadelaide at gmail.com> wrote:
> At one of the wikipedias, the one in Swedish, a discussion has arisen if it
> would be possible to elect admins on a term of, say, one year. Admins whose
> actions often are questioned would then have little chance of getting
> re-elected, and choosing not so perfect admins would not be such a big
> problem as it currently is.
>
> At a previous stage, soneome at svwiki said that this would simply not be
> possible, since it is so difficult to get someone de-admined. Today there is
> a functioning structure of stewarts, and I wonder - if svwiki started this
> system, where admins aren't elected forever but for a term of a
> predetermined time, would "the international" object? Would stewarts get
> tired of demand after demand from svwiki to take the admin rights from
> admins whose one year term run out, or would it be seen as OK?
>
> It is difficult to puch the question, as long as we don't know if the
> argument "it would not be allowed" is correct or not.
>
> Best,
> Hanna
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>