On Sunday 02 March 2008 18:56, David Gerard wrote:
The arbcom is quite happy to remove the admin bit from *bad* admins as
needed, sometimes in a sudden midnight swoop.
Admins are servants of the community, not the Arbitrary Committee; thus,
de-adminning is properly a community decision.
I'd say there's not a
problem in practice removing the bit from actually bad admins (as
opposed to, e.g., momentarily unpopular ones).
I realize we're not necessarily talking about my particular proposal here, but
there's a reason why it requires that someone fail to meet the threshold for
two consecutive weeks (and that number is, well, just a number--change it if
need be; the principle remains the same).
The problem IMO is the sorta crappy ones. Which gets subjective. And
it would obviously be better to lure them encouragingly toward
non-crapness rather than just saying "Fail. *bang*"
It's not obvious to me. The good of the community comes before the feelings
of admins. A reasonable argument can be made that it is indeed best for the
community to maintain some stability in adminship and keep them happy, but
it's certainly not self-evidently true.
--
Kurt Weber
<kmw(a)armory.com>