On 03/03/2008, Kurt Maxwell Weber kmw@armory.com wrote:
On Sunday 02 March 2008 18:56, David Gerard wrote:
The arbcom is quite happy to remove the admin bit from *bad* admins as needed, sometimes in a sudden midnight swoop.
Admins are servants of the community, not the Arbitrary Committee; thus, de-adminning is properly a community decision.
And the arbcom is the elected power of last resort in en:wp, and has the power of deadminning when it is needed. This may be a good or bad thing, but it's how things presently stand.
I'd say there's not a problem in practice removing the bit from actually bad admins (as opposed to, e.g., momentarily unpopular ones).
I realize we're not necessarily talking about my particular proposal here, but there's a reason why it requires that someone fail to meet the threshold for two consecutive weeks (and that number is, well, just a number--change it if need be; the principle remains the same).
A system like this has been proposed many times before. Why did it fail those times? What can we learn from history?
- d.