[WikiEN-l] Analysis of Request for Adminship

[David Alexander Russell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Don't know about day-by-day, but Interiot's edit counter tool (linked to
from his userpage) gives a month-by-month edit breakdown

Cynical

Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Steve Bennett wrote:
> 
>> On 3/31/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> The two year version is more likely to know why we are where we are
>>> now. Admins who don't know this tend to cause interesting problems.
>>> This can also be the case with returning admins. There are other
>>> differences that are also likely to exist.
>>>    
>>>
>> Could a one month editor not be a good admin? If they could, then why
>> do we have such prejudice against the idea?
>>
> A one-month editor could be a good admin.  What a minimum time rule 
> really tests is patience.  Is he willing to stick around when things get 
> tedious.  If he goes away when he doesn't get made a sysop right away 
> maybe he wasn't meant to be one.
> 
> Has anyone done a statistical  analysis of the day-by-day contributions 
> of editors and graphed their number of edits over perhaps the first 100 
> days after they registe?.  Does boredom hit suddenly or do the edits 
> gradually diminish?
> 
> Ec
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> 
> 
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFELvdUg8fvtQYQevcRAu3QAKCVliz2vD3H3yqLQwfOt9pFP1ew8wCdE5mi
MSustW8DUvfsFzZaJFcWYss=
=ACUD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----