On 2/9/07, Timwi timwi@gmx.net wrote:
Joshua Brady wrote:
- Wikipedia doubles every 6 months, we need an admin pool to
compensate it, and we need those who will focus on handling admin issues, not waive the mop around for 2 months and discontinue use. So lets not look at a new admin based on his edit count, but his contributions and WILLINGNESS.
Here is this wrong sentiment again. Just because you need admins who "will focus on handling admin issues", you are (incorrectly) concluding that people who only "waive the mop around for 2 months and discontinue use" are somehow worthless and therefore shouldn't be made admins. Even if someone helps out with some admin tasks for only 2 months, surely they're worth more than they would be if they couldn't do any of it because they're denied access to the admin functions. You never know if one of them stays on and becomes the focussed admin you need.
Out of everything I posted, how did you draw the conclusion that I said anything to the effect that, those who "wave the mop around for 2 months and discontinue use" were worthless?
I simply stated that we need more admins who were willing to stick it out for the long haul.
Timwi
- Josh