Having fixed terms is an excellent idea. One or
two
year appointments would be ample, and would not be
overly burdensom. A
sysop whose term had expired could
stand for re-election after (say) 6
months.
Mark
No offense, but I think this is an extremely bad
idea. With
maybe one or two exceptions, our sysops are
trustworthy,
reliable, and obedient to the rules. Having
elections, on the
other hand, would be like ringing the dinner
bell for everyone
troll or vandal with an axe to grind against
a particular sysop
(or sysops). In addition, the administrative
overhead would be
fearsome. I'd also like to point out that by your 1 sysop/1000
article standard, we're about
40 sysops below strength.
Now, in the past, I have complained that a
lot of people are
getting nominated for adminship without being
here long enough.
I think this criticism is valid. I don't
recognize most of the names
coming up on the RFA these days, and that
worries me. I think
people need to be a bit more critical of new
requests, but I don't
think that means that we should be trying to cull
down the number
of sysops - don't throw the baby out with the
bathwater.
--Mark