jayjg wrote:
On 6/17/07, Ray Saintonge wrote:
jayjg wrote:
On 6/17/07, The Mangoe wrote:
What strikes me the most, hoever, is how this fits into an incresing effort by current admins to apply litmus tests against candidates.
There have always been "litmus tests" applied to candidates, typically revolving around how many edits they've made, how much vandal reverting they
do, etc. There are also some standard questions that are now asked, as another litmus test.
Vandal fighting is only one thing that admins can do. Some people would want to be admins for completely different reasons. Demanding vandal fighting experience only helps to guarantee that combative people will get the privilege.
Yes, but what exactly does that have to do with anything? People apply various litmus tests to admin candidates, including vandal fighting. I happen to think that's a bad test, but others disagree.
I'm glad to read that we agree on something.