[WikiEN-l] Major dysfunction in RfA Culture

[The Cunctator]

On 4/15/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/15/07, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
> > On 15/04/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 15/04/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Given the number of de-facto inactive admins we already have I don't
> > > > see much benefit in that approach.
> > >
> > > 1. It would reduce the harmfulness to the community of the present
> RFA.
> > > 2. "De-facto inactive admins" do not harm the project.
> >
> > I have never understood why Geni considers "paper admins" (a phrase he
> > has used a number of times since I've been reading this list) to be
> > harmful. Geni, would you care to explain?
> >
> >
>
> 1)lowers the social pressure on admins to be active.
>
> 100 admin actions a month can be  less than an hour a month depending
> on what you are doing. If we could get that our of people our backlogs
> would be shorter. At the moment we have maybe 300 admins who are
> active at that rate.
>
> The upshot of this lack of expectations is that people can get the
> social benefits of adminship without doing the work. It would be nice
> to change that.


"Social benefits of adminship"? Wikipedia ain't a club.