Board Thread:Wiki News/@comment-9946604-20130629025530

Jens told someone a few days ago I was handling the application process. Let's try this then.

Admin candidates do not apply, they are nominated by existing admins. The nominator presents a case for why this person should be an admin. Having a system of requirements such as edits seems unnecessesary this way. Prospective candidates and 'junior members' worth investing in should be made chatmods to encourage and foster growth.

If the candidate wishies to accept, they reply with their name, other wikis or names they have used on wikia, and age threshold*.


 * Age threshold is asking a string of questions to verify a valid age without violating policy.  A candidate may reply 'yes', 'no', or choose not to answer.  This way, we only need ask if they are old enogh to hold the position.
 * Are you older than 13 (yes/no answer) - default/chatmod
 * Are you older than 14 (yes/no answer) - sysop only (basic admin)
 * Are you older than 16 (yes/no answer) - bureaucrat only

Once a user has accepted nomination, confirmed age threshold, and confirmed alternate wiki activity, voting begins. All sysop and higher have a vote. No one is obligated to explain their vote, but it helps; especially if you vote against. 72 hours after the user accepts, voting ends. Jens has veto right on any candidate and is not required to explain why.

Use of Kudos is suggested when good arguments for/against are made. These threads will be closed to prevent tampering. The last few weeks have shown that most regular users don't really care about our internal politics, so I don't feel leaving them out of the vote is a problem.

I don't think we can have 'too many admins' as this really means 'trusted contributor'. Jens may not agree and may prefer a cap. I don't think anyone here will challenge his right to veto.

All nominations should have their own thread. While those will be closed, I'll leave this one open so any non-admins may feel free to comment. 