Re Stephanie's point
"Rfa reform and attempts to streamline desysopping have been largely
stonewalled by relatively few people. Thats just one area but one of
the longest running ones."
Actually that's two very different areas, and one of the most common
tactics to stonewall RFA reform is to switch the subject to
deadminship.
I've been documenting the RFA drought for quite some time now at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers/RFA_by_month and
judging from the last few months, the drought that we've been in since
rollback was unbundled in early 2008 has entered a new and drier
phase. Yes we've had four admins get through in the last 48 hours, the
best flurry since late October. But all four of our new admins have
been editing for over three years. RFA may be be broken, but
candidates with cleanblock logs, long tenure and lots of manual
editing can still usually get through. The questions we need to ask
ourselves include:
How can we persuade people who started editing 15 months to three
years ago to run for adminship?
How many more potential candidates are there who first registered
three or more years ago?
With total editing broadly stable, how long can we maintain a 1%
monthly drop in the number of our active admins?
It shouldn't surprise anyone that the only admins we have who started
editing in 2010 are bots, but only 13 editors who started editing in
2009 are now admins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&dir=prev&am…
But to get back to the gendergap issue, the good news is that two of
our four new admins are female.
WereSpielChequers