Board Thread:Community Voting/@comment-30683785-20160806191843/@comment-4257955-20160808195831

Johnyjo wrote: BusyCityGirl wrote: ...Also, no one has ever been able to explain to me what real harm an inactive mod is doing. Food for thought. The closest to a halfway decent reason I've heard is, "They won't be up to date on the rules if they're inactive too long." That, honestly, is just silly though. All good mods stay up to date always. Most especially when returning after a long time away! Even if a certain mod returns and takes a couple days to get around to brushing up on things, they can easily observe other mods and let them handle things. Or if they apply a rule that no longer exsists, a simple explanation from someone solves that slip up in a jiffy. ...*a 3 page essay starts forming in my mind* People are always complaining about how there's too many Mods. While, frankly, I don't care, if you've been inactive for 6 months, it's only fair that you loose your position so that there's more room for other people. ?

There isn't some cap for user rights. If a mod is inactive, their rights wouldn't be considered in the discussion of there being "too many mods." They would merely sit in the back, gathering dust, until they ever decided to come back to the wiki. I have never seen an RfR affected by the existence of inactive mods. No "room" has to be made in this regard.

As a result, I vote B.