Steve Bennett wrote:
On 3/31/06, geni geniice@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