Board Thread:Wiki Running/@comment-3225604-20160106132717/@comment-3225604-20160110042543

3primetime3 wrote: How about this? If a user is doing a really good job, and many people favor him/her, then a standard forum highlighted thread is held. If 7/10 users support, then the user qualifies. That can be achieved using the bureaucrat nomination method, except just a few additional rules which are easy to achieve. Definitely, you haven't read the whole thing...

3primetime3 wrote: And if a user wants to be admin, the user would probably look at these rules and get allergic to them, which is why NO ONE IS VOTING. I think it's more ridiculous not to look the whole proposal and think that the whole thing is rewriting the whole self-nomination method cliche... Please... Other users can nominate the user, not just only nominating oneself. Other than that, normally a user can fulfill the requirements. Under this new rule, for example, Cheekian is eligible to apply on 11 January 2016 (sorry if I used your name as an example), but for the old rule Cheekian isn't. My point is that the eligibility rule can be so easily achieved that you don't need to have an eye on it. Oh I forgot one thing: '''The rule "The candidate must have two edits per 48 hours in the past 15 days." can be exempted if you have proof explaining your short leave'''. If you can't simply follow easy rules on how to apply, how do I expect you to cope with administrative work or even participating in online forums (they do have a long list of tedious rules) or even posts/jobs in your real life?

3primetime3 wrote: This entire system to me is ridiculous, I have to say. I hope you were aware of what you're saying 3primetime3. You know I did borrow some methods of electing admins from other wikis right? By saying that, you are saying the election method of other authoritative wikis is ridiculous, including Wookiepedia, Runescape Wiki, Fallout Wiki etc. If you think some part of the system is ridiculous, I can explain.