On 6/9/06, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/9/06, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Not really. No one wikipedian could really effect
something with that
much inertia. With admins picking up increaseing control RFA is one
of the last ways none admins can really infulence the project.
Realisticaly you are looking at a cold dead hands situation if you
want to remove it.
Exactly why it needs to be removed now before it becomes completely
entrenched. First we started getting people who wanted adminship to
have control, and now they have adminship, and are taking control. We
should have stopped this a year ago, but we weren't paying attention,
and now we have a lot of bad admins to show for it.
What do you want to use instead? Personally I don't mind RFA that much.
Although I do think the editcountis is getting out of hand. When I started
looking at it in september I think, the limit most people used was 1000
edits, now I already see oppose votes for less then 3000 edits.
If we have bad admins, perhaps it should be made easier to de-admin them. I
do agree that this should not be done by the community, since that could
turn out to be a lynching. (userbox issue for instance) Perhaps by arbcom?
They don't seem to be that busy anyway. :)
Garion96