2008/7/26 Jon <scream(a)datascreamer.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
As some of you already know, I've undergone an RFA recently. Thats ok.
No matter the result, I try to vote on some RFA's whenever I ask for
the community do discuss me.
On the same token, I try to vote on some AFDs (or close some) whenever I
submit an AFD.
As I read some of the RFAs ongoing, I discovered a trend. So I looked
into the recent historical RFA votes. (Lets not get to wrapped around
vote=!vote, for simplicity of this proposal/idea, I'll call all
comments, discussions... votes)
I have discovered what appears to be a trend in clique mentality and
power centralization. Also, I have discovered some crazy oppositions,
for example "I view self noms a prima facia evidence of power hunger."
This is among the craziest I've seen. Not that the editor is crazy, but
the oppose is.
Here is my suggested solution:
Allow editors (those who have not already undergone RFA, desysopped
under a cloud, and desysopped by Arbitration) to sysop after 2500 edits
and 6 months on the project without any recent behavior related blocks.
Permit the crats or admins to grant and take away adminship. If this
idea has some support on the mailing list (with any suggested
alterations) I think I might put up a policy page as I have done on
IPBLOCKEXEMPT for discussion.
The advantages of such a system would eliminate power centralization,
clique mentality, and some of these outrageous opposes.
Everyone here is an academic. We are building en encyclopedia.
Why are you posting this off-wiki? The place for this discussion (which is a
perennial one, by the way) is the RFA talk page.