Board Thread:Wiki Running/@comment-3225604-20150619060400/@comment-4189499-20150630054238

Catinthedark wrote: I am starting to have serrrrrrious misgivings about the edit count requirement. And not because I don't have it for anybody thinking that.

I thought that if anything, it could be a positive motivator to participate, at least some.

It seems it can also be an incentive to just rack up a number, just for the sake of it, and that isn't necessarily a good thing. Exactly. How many edits are made gives no clue to the amount of effort made per edit. For example, proof-reading edits to correct spelling/grammar are very important, but they don't take as much effort as filling in a major section of a new level page. Because of this, the edit count isn't a very good standard to judge the quality or the amount of effort somebody has put into editing this wiki.

The other problem is that some people might think that becoming an administrator is some sort of right which is awarded if an individual makes a certain amount of edits, when there are so many other considerations to take into account when choosing an admin. You don't want people to be under any illusion that they can become an admin just by making 1000 edits or however many it is, especially as those who are under that impression may go to certain lengths to edit in such a way as to just raise their edit count as opposed to making edits in a constructive manner, such as making a lot of individual edits on a page rather than making all the changes at once.