User blog comment:Alemas2005/Administrator Performance Ratings - Two Years-2 months Later (with non-RfA Admins)/@comment-7855039-20160220231330

 1)

A) Alemas: Four. Constant effort being put into the wiki; I truly see him trying his best to make everything run as smoothly as possible. Like Guac said, he also takes initiative on new ideas. I used to think Alemas was more interested in the day-to-day operations but I'm glad to see him taking on more of the big-picture stuff as well. He is great at managing the other admins and getting done things that need to be done (CV openings, highlighting things, dealing with punishments, reminding other admins/users of votes and discussions, etc. Plus a strong editing/technical background which can be used when necessary). The reason I do not vote five, however, due to the fact Alemas can be hyperactive in his behavior, which can sometimes create problems. However, I believe this hyperactivity is unintentional, and I see him trying to do his best. Furthermore, he can sometimes can come across as a bit direct, which can harm his relationship with users who are appealing their ban/block/whatever. There's a certain behavior that's needed around hostile users that I believe Alemas, bless his heart, does not have. :P Still solid performance tho, so Four.

B) EED: Two. This is because, as others have said, EED is very inactive on the wiki, and therefore is absent from much of the important day-to-day activity. That being said, I do see him partaking in some of the more “big picture” decisions, and his opinion is often valued in those cases. This bumps him up from being a one to a two, in my opinion. Simply increasing his activity and being more involved would improve my rating immensely.

C) Goggles: Two. Goggles, while not as inactive as EED, also has somewhat of sporadic activity. Like I said with EED, because of this sporadicity, he misses much of the everyday activity that being an admin requires. See B) for more.

D) Jdude: Four. Level-headed, kind. Has a solid understanding of chat discipline, the way the wiki should work, etc. Good at handling discussions. Not a five because – although he is indeed strong in most categories, and checks all boxes – he is not outstanding in any certain area.

E) Loney: Four. Going to somewhat reiterate what Guac and MY said. There’s not a certain area you struggle in, but there is something that holds me back from rating 5. My best guess would be you can be a bit too passive in some situations, however, this is not a glaring issue and you’re doing a solid job as admin.

F) Mad: Three. Handles a lot of the day-to-day stuff and is extremely helpful. Not afraid to do what needs to be done, in terms of administrative duties/technicalities. I docked one point, however, due to a large inability to deal with situations/disruptions appropriately, politely, and professionally. I had to dock another point, too, due to a misunderstanding of how to behave around certain users at certain times/instances.   <span style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#3a3a3a;font-weight:400;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;">G) Melt: Four. Great at anything technical, which was his main argument for promotion with the absence of users like Spy and Drew. Extremely helpful. Great at moderating, and deals with users/situations appropriately and precisely. That being said, I’d like to see Melt get more involved in threads/blogs/etc., as he can a bit passive. What I said in the last sentence of Rio’s review (see below) also applies to Melt, but not as much.

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.89;margin-top:11pt;margin-bottom:11pt;"><span style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#3a3a3a;font-weight:400;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;">H) Rio: Four. Very good understanding of user base and community. Acts in an appropriate manner depending on the situation he is presented with. While Rio is stellar in moderating chat and threads/blog/forums, I see him tend to not take as much initiative as admins like Alemas or Madkat in terms of administrative technicalities. I’d remind Rio he is not just a moderator, but an administrator, and that requires additional administrative duties rather than extensive moderation-related ones (if that makes sense).

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.89;margin-top:11pt;margin-bottom:11pt;"><span style="font-size:13.333333333333332px;font-family:Arial;color:#3a3a3a;font-weight:400;font-variant:normal;text-decoration:none;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap;">I) ZX: Four. Solid admin and I only see improvements. Good understanding of the community. Overall checks most boxes. Like JD, he is not outstanding in any certain area. Sometimes has a tendency to not be confident/clear.. and I think Guac nailed it when he said ZX could be more efficient in minimizing disruption -- still, very solid admin.

<p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.89;margin-top:11pt;margin-bottom:11pt;">

<p dir="ltr" style="margin-top:11pt;margin-bottom:11pt;"> 2)

When put against each other I see no administrator who is outstandingly better than the others. Therefore, I vote for no one.