[WikiEN-l] BADSITES vs RFA

[Gabe Johnson]

On 5/30/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/30/07, Slim Virgin <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Or, worse, they're so clueful it's their second or third admin account.
>
> Evidence or drop the accusation.
>
> > That's exactly right. It used to be more than enough to have 1,000
> > edits, so long as they were decent edits; now it's rarely enough, but
> > no one looks at quality. What quality is there to look at when you're
> > staring at thousands of vandalism reverts?
>
> I think the people decided the requirement for one FA was unreasonable.
>
> > We know that the easy way to build up a sockpuppet account fast is to
> > do CVU and vote in AfDs. So what do we do? We promote vandal fighters
> > whose only project space edits are AfDs. I take the point that we
> > can't become paranoid, but complacency's no good either.
> >
>
> Because guess which group of people most need admin powers?
>
> > When people ask me now what they need to do to prepare for adminship,
> > I invariably have to tell them to do the vandalism thing, which they
> > shouldn't have to if they're mature candidates and good writers. Then
> > they risk not getting promoted because they blocked a vandal without
> > using the right tags ...
>
> That would be quite impressive. Generally it is quite hard to block
> people before being given an admin bit.
>
> --
> geni
>

Geni has the right point here. Article-writers simply don't need the
admin tools ass much. ~~~~
-- 
Absolute Power
C^7rr8p£5 ab£$^u7£%y