On 2/27/07, Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
I would argue that hyper-active admins are more likely to have a short admin career (whether that be because of desysopping or just leaving), and further that the likelihood is greater than proportional to their edits.
Not exactly whuile the burn out rate is high (2-3 of the top ten on that list I posted are gone) most are not that new.
My ideal situation would be that admins would be very active initially so they can learn the ropes,
You can't inforce this
and that they would then settle down to an activity level more characteristic of the long tail, where they are not so much admins but editors with admin powers who regularly (but not excessively) help out the current batch of very active new admins and once in a while clear out backlogs.
There are not enough new admins. Throw in the rate of rule shift and you have a problem with the older admins.
The long tail isn't doing enough with the result that the head has to.