2,149
edits
SmashWiki talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
SmashWiki talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 1 (view source)
Revision as of 16:15, August 17, 2008
, 16 years ago→opening back up nominations?
No edit summary |
Shadowcrest (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
I am against opening the requests for adminship again, but I think out of the current nominees there should be at least two more chosen. And then that is all, no more sysops or nominations...things get out of hand as you can see.--[[User:Oxico|Oxico]] ([[User talk:Oxico|talk]]) 19:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC) | I am against opening the requests for adminship again, but I think out of the current nominees there should be at least two more chosen. And then that is all, no more sysops or nominations...things get out of hand as you can see.--[[User:Oxico|Oxico]] ([[User talk:Oxico|talk]]) 19:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
:::Regular users cannot block vandals or delete spam pages. What you all need to understand is that sysop rights are simply an extension of regular editing abilities. It is not a paid position as some make it seem. There is no reason not to give out sysop rights to users who have been trusted by the community. And what exactly is out of hand right now? If it's the joke nominations, there have always been joke nominations on lots of wikis. That is no reason to deny sysop access to contributors who actually deserve it. [[User:Dtm142|Dtm142]] ([[User talk:Dtm142|talk]]) 19:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC) | :::Regular users cannot block vandals or delete spam pages. What you all need to understand is that sysop rights are simply an extension of regular editing abilities. It is not a paid position as some make it seem. There is no reason not to give out sysop rights to users who have been trusted by the community. And what exactly is out of hand right now? If it's the joke nominations, there have always been joke nominations on lots of wikis. That is no reason to deny sysop access to contributors who actually deserve it. [[User:Dtm142|Dtm142]] ([[User talk:Dtm142|talk]]) 19:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
::::I am unclear on the reasoning behind closing the RFAs. Is it because the admins don't have the time to deal with stuff? RFAs don't have to be decided overnight. My own nomination back on GuildWiki took 3 months to be decided. That is more than enough time, even for uber-busy admins. If you haven't had enough free time to vote in 3 months, then... well, you're probably not qualified enough to make an accurate judgment anyway. If I'm totally off the mark, then... enlighten me. --[[User:Shadowcrest|<font face="vivaldi" size="3" color="Steelblue">Shadowcrest</font>]] 20:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC) | |||