> On 14 July 2010 02:07, FT2 <ft2.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The expectations upon admins are the pivot point for that. See [[ >> User:FT2/RfA <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FT2/RfA>]]. >> >> Any ideas how we can get somewhere like that? >> >> FT2 >> > > Well to start with you could chuck your requirements out of the > window. Your requirements like most at RFA are selecting for 3 things > > 1)some degree of editing skill > 2)Not appearing to cause trouble > 3)A decent set of wikipolitics skill > > > It's two and three that cause the problem. Anyone whith a decent set > of wikipolitics skills is going to archive 2 by playing safe going > along with the flow and not challenging things. Almost anyone actually > passing RFA is going to have got into the habit of going along with > the ah "bad faith combined with mob justice". The people who might > actually try to challenge such things are unlikely to pass RFA because > either they lack the wikipolitics skills needed in order to pass (you > would tend to fail them under the "nor into politicking" clause among > others) or because they are not prepared to use them in a way that > would let them pass. > > Upshot is that we have for some years now been promoting a bunch of > admins who will go with the flow rather than challenge low level bad > behavior by admins and long standing users. The tiny number of rebels > and iconoclasts left are from years ago and have little to day to day > stuff. > > -- > geni
Yes, that does seem to be the main requirement, a successful candidate must never have taken a stand. This for a job that requires taking stands. Fred _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
