Board Thread:Wiki Running/@comment-17897872-20150812004159/@comment-17897872-20150812021731

Wildoneshelper wrote: Well in the future it may not be that simple. Remember how we are promoted as bureaucrats? I don't think we could obviously tell who would or would not make a good admin. I think there are "some" users who think we "couldn't" tell who would make a good admin. It is still better to have a vote from users because we still have to make sure we did not do anything wrong. We can so far tell that making a good admin hasn't proven us wrong. We already knew Catinthedark and Imamadmad, for example, would do well, right? These two could have been voted for admins this way instead of the tedious process now or the second process. I know mistakes happen, but the risk of making a bad admin is far less than making a bad bureaucrat. Maybe some bad bans that can be undone by others. This would be really rare, but fixable. And also, I don't think we don't have anyone close to make a bureaucrat yet.

I have also linked your nomination method on my highlight as well as my nomination method on yours. Hope you don't mind that!