Board Thread:Administrative Requests/@comment-25396609-20171007215936/@comment-25936766-20171007220934

Copy-pasted from the other thread, there are things people need to keep in mind:

Regarding Absence and Inactivity

Just because they don't interact too much, it doesn't mean they aren't there, watching.

At the same time, it should be noted that the things a bureaucrat could do, for the most part can be done by admins or mods. A guy could come and vandalize an article, and before the Bureucrat can try to fix it, an admin already did, with their Staff Roles not altering their efficiency on this matter.

This is especially the case when there's like a dozen or 2 members on staff, including Rollbacks, Mods, and Content Mods. It's like having 20 police officers in a single room.

Sure, a Bureaucrat could step in and fix the problem, but the fact is that multiple members on staff do act quickly and fix the problem before the rest could. If an officer already arrested the perpetrator, why should the other 19 officers rush to catch them too?

Of course, one could also argue that this promotes lazyness. The Bureaucrat has no need to step in because his 20+ fellow staff members already do. On the other hand, there's also the matter of Impression; see, let's say you made a harmless edit trying to help, but it went against the guidelines and was removed.

Imagine if you were suddenly "confronted" by the Big Boss of the Wiki for it instead of just an admin or mod. It would be a bit more "scary", no? It'd be like being confronted by the governor themself. That could cause a bit more panic than necesary.

Regarding number of edits: Why are "number of edits done in X period of time" important?

1) Doing a lot of edits doesn't mean one is a good candidate for mod/admin/crat. Nor is not making too little edits an indicator that someone wouldn't be a good mod/admin/crat. Quantity =/= Quality.

One could have done, say, 500 edits in 2 months, of which 490 were so small they don't even make a difference. Or one could have done only 20 edits in 4 months, of which 18 were big, noticeable, and really improved the wiki's articles.

2) Like I said, there are dozens of members on staff, many of them capable of doing the same basic functions, particularly when dealing with vandals or making edits to pages.

Why should one make an edit to a page when someone else already did the job in a satisfactory manner?