[Foundation-l] Emergency on Wiktionary

[Filip Maljkovic]

Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Walter Vermeir wrote:
>
>   
>> Ray Saintonge schreef:
>> [cut]
>>  
>>
>>     
>>> While it is also possible that there can be rogue bureaucrats, these 
>>> will be proportionally rarer than rogue admins.  Anyone who has become a 
>>> bureaucrat has a very high degree of trust in the community, and 
>>> especially in relatively larger communities there is sufficient 
>>> oversight to prevent the abuses that may be more common with the 
>>> untested bureaucrats of tiny communities.  Speaking arbitrarily, one 
>>> could define a larger community, as one with at least 50,000 articles 
>>> and/or 2 active bureaucrats.
>>>
>>> Ec
>>>    
>>>
>>>       
>> Not all wikis are the same. You can not project the situation of EN to
>> all other wikis.
>>
>> I have just done a de-sysop/de-bureaucrat on the Serbian Wikpedia. There
>> the have (now) 40 sysops and of those 25 are bureaucrat.
>>
>> That is from my POV an irresponsible number of bureaucrats. I do not
>> know how many active user there are. The have 34700 articles.
>>
>>     
> 25 bureaucrats on such a small project doesn't make sense considering 
> the limited duties that are reserved for bureaucrats.  Still it's up to 
> the sr community to sort that one out.
>
> Ec
>   
The fact that we have that many bureaucrats comes from our character as 
a community: up until recently we've been pretty open and hadn't made a 
big deal out of administrators and bureaucrats. But now, with what's 
been happening recently, I think that there's a consensus that we should 
reduce the number of bureaucrats to a minimum (5 or so) that would carry 
out the bureaucrat tasks when they are asked.

Filip