Board Thread:Wiki Running/@comment-3225604-20150812013021/@comment-3225604-20150812025626

3primetime3 wrote: ... ''Do we need a voting round? It gets repetitive when we need both a voting round and nomination round. Can't we just start with the nomination round? And 1 week. Thank you!''

The nomination round is completely different from voting round. It's just like gaining some support from some users first before you go to real voting. It sometimes also gives some advice to the candidate on why he is good enough to be an admin. The nomination round also contains prerequisites that will decide whether you can be voted or not. Generally, nomination round is inevitable if you have prerequisites.

''Okay, but even if all admins vote support, the person can't be nominated if no normal users vote? Seems odd.''

Yup, because Candy Crush Saga Wiki is shared among the community, not just only administrators. Normal users should have a say who should be admins or not. In this wiki, what affects the most is the normal users as administrators have access to many areas.

''Yes, we need prerequisites if we do it this way. The threads can be instantly closed if the prerequisites are not met. But I still don't agree with mainspace edits and such. Rather how active the user is and how long the user has been here is more important. Also we still don't need a voting round of supports, the nomination rounds will already iron out the novices.''

There is no actual requirement for mainspace edits. Two edits per day within a month does not mean two mainspace edits per day. The edits include commenting and replying. Two is already the very minimum it could get. For me, I think two edits per day shows the least how active the user should be.

Let's say it this way:
 * Nomination round: The prerequisites (I consider the admin letter and 4 user supports as a prerequisite for being a part in the community)
 * Voting round: Your votes

I still fail to see why we need recommendation letters.

Well, recommendation letter from an admin shows why the user qualifies to be an admin and why s/he is good enough to be an admin. Basically, the user can say whatever s/he wants if there is no one proving what s/he says is true.

''If a bureaucrat wants a user to be nominated, simply ask the user whether or not he has no problem. Approved by all bureaucrats? That's kind of sad if one bureaucrat really hates the user and everyone else loves him.''

This is because I encourage users to be active rather than passive. Users should strive for a position, not sitting there waiting to be nominated. Even though this path fails, the user can be an admin through the other path. I think asking for ranks is not a bad thing, as long as it is done politely.