Since many users complained about too many promotions recently, I think we should think about a rework of the whole system. For example we could only enable requesting if we need new users with special rights. That is only an idea of mine so far. How the rework exactly should look like must be debated later.
5,988
pages
ALL POSTS
</noscript>
</noscript>
</noscript>
0
With the way our system here works, you don't need to oppose to stop a request. A neutral can be just as effective, since 20/25 supporting votes are required for anything to happen. If everyone goes neutral, and the candidate does not get that many votes, then it is unsuccessful. "We have too many" is perfectly acceptable reason for going neutral, even if it isn't okay for an oppose.
(Edited by Drew1200)
TwistedAlpha wrote:
Obi the LEGO Fan wrote:
TwistedAlpha wrote:
Obi the LEGO Fan wrote: I think it could be a good idea to temporarily close RfCM until more mods are actually needed, agreed.
You think we need more admins? We currently have 21 (active) CMs and 7 (active) admins according to Alemas... isn't that more than enough?
No, we don't need more admins. However, it is extremely hard to get the needed votes for admin, and I think everyone with a chance of getting it has already submitted their requests.
Two people got it in a matter of a few days, out of three applicants, and the third is pretty close. Everyone has a chance of getting it and as Marcel said, people will vote for their friends and stuff. It's not about who'd about make a good admin and who wouldn't to the community...
I think you are forgetting about the requirements for admin. Not very many people meet the qualifications, and of those who do, most of them have already said they wouldn't run any time soon. There are under ten qualified and active users who could request admin rights. The three users who requested were the top candidates, and it is highly unlikely that their success will be duplicated.
(Edited by Obi the LEGO Fan)
Drew1200 wrote: With the way our system here works, you don't need to oppose to stop a request. A neutral can be just as effective, since 20/25 supporting votes are required for anything to happen. If everyone goes neutral, and the candidate does not get that many votes, then it is unsuccessful. "We have too many" is perfectly acceptable reason for going neutral, even if it isn't okay for an oppose.
I see no reason why you can't oppose someone for rights because we don't need more. I don't want someone to have rights unless them having the rights will benefit the wiki.
(Edited by Obi the LEGO Fan)
0
Obi the LEGO Fan wrote:
Drew1200 wrote: With the way our system here works, you don't need to oppose to stop a request. A neutral can be just as effective, since 20/25 supporting votes are required for anything to happen. If everyone goes neutral, and the candidate does not get that many votes, then it is unsuccessful. "We have too many" is perfectly acceptable reason for going neutral, even if it isn't okay for an oppose.
I see no reason why you can't oppose someone for rights because we don't need more. I don't want someone to have rights unless them having the rights will benefit the wiki.
I wouldn't strike an oppose for that reason, but as many of the users have already said, it would be very hard for me to oppose a person's request just because I think it's "unnecessary".
(Edited by Drew1200)
1
What Obi said is spot-on, the top three candidates for Admin put up their RfRs, if Jed doesn't make it I doubt we'll be getting another Admin for quite some time. As far as RfCM go, I've been thinking and there really aren't many contenders left with a good chance of getting in, really just a few. So, unless someone makes a petition that gets 20 Supports to close down RfCM&A I don't see any need to do jack-squat with ReqfR, besides adding Buro- but that's a whole 'nother topic.
And if you feel strongly about too many CMs, then vote Oppose on CM reqs for that reason, as Obi said.
«†J•cI•u•cI•e•420†» (Wall) -Retired Bureaucrat
(Edited by Jdude420)
1
Oh yeah, I forgot to say "per Obi" 
</noscript>
It's really too early to be making any big decisions like this, since the system is too new for us to be getting a an accurate idea of what it will be like in the future.
(Edited by Drew1200)
0
Yeah, good point.
(Edited by Jdude420)
Obi the LEGO Fan wrote: I think it could be a good idea to temporarily close RfCM until more mods are actually needed, agreed.
Wasn't it you who said that the amount of chat mods doesn't really matter?
</noscript>
(Edited by Nxtstep101)
Nxtstep101 wrote:
Obi the LEGO Fan wrote: I think it could be a good idea to temporarily close RfCM until more mods are actually needed, agreed.
Wasn't it you who said that the amount of chat mods doesn't really matter?
</noscript>
I said that there was no cost to having a lot of mods in chat, and that the claim "we have too many mods" makes no sense, since no one has ever proven it to be a bad thing that we have a lot of mods.
That doesn't mean, however, that we need more. There is no good reason to promote more chat mods right now.
(Edited by Obi the LEGO Fan)
0
Per Jdude. If you don't want new mods, vote against them. But within the next month or two a canidate might come along that is seen as acceptable for the position, and we don't want to bar the opportunity from anyone.
As for Admin RfR, perhaps we could put a limit on how many new ones could be accepted, say 1 a month? And if multiple users get 25 votes the community could then vote on which one they would rather have.
(Edited by IndyAJD)