[WikiEN-l] Solid, obvious, elegant, workable deadminning criteria? (was No RFAs in progress...)

[cohesion]

On 8/23/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think there is any "might" about it. If we relax admin
> requirements, we will get more bad admins and will need to desysop
> them.

I was just saying we should wait and see. I don't really think there
is a huge problem anyway. People that discuss this on the mailing list
are not representative of every editor. There is a bias to think
everyone wants to be an admin, that's simply not true. If you make
people admins based on some criteria you will get a lot of people that
have the tools to cleanup admin backlogs but lack the desire, as they
were happily editing articles on bridges, or Nevada, and will continue
to do so.

I think people that become admins should be somewhat self-motivated,
they should *want* to be admins. BUT it shouldn't be hard. Just have a
new system where people ask to be admins, a bureaucrat looks at their
history to make sure they are generally ok and decides, and then in 3
months there is a retrospective discussion. If the discussion has
consensus to deadmin, do so. Easy. While we're at it let's rename
admin to custodian or curator :)

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion