Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27002181-20151230003818

   Well, y'all. Here on the wiki, we have been buckling down to get our wiki is tip-top shape. And I'd say we're doing a pretty good job now that the rules page is fully revised and is being taken into full action. But now, it's time to talk about the Adminship policies and junk. It's time we change this too. Below, there are numerous topics about Adminship that I feel need to be changed and revised.

 Applying for Adminship and Elections? Alright, so actually, I acknowledged this problem a few years ago. For those who are like "Gurl, waht?" Click here and see for yourself. And before anyone is like, "Wait! What did Deadly do?" WE'RE NOT BRINGING UP ANYTHING IN THE PAST SO DON'T ASK. Anyway, yes. A year ago, I was really aggravated that on the original admin request page that people would simply put  SUPPORT  or  OPPOSE  without a signature or a reason why. I swear it was literally "Give away rights to everyone day!" Because really, ALOT of users had rights. Some who even had little to no edits, but still had rights. Don't worry, that's all taken care of. So now, I'm asking we revise how applying for adminship works. I personally feel like we have more than enough admins and we should stay at 15 users with special rights. I would like to propose that 15 is the maximum number of users to have special rights. Because really people, we aren't exactly a big community. So, I'm sorry for those who planned on applying for adminship later, but we aren't a big wiki and we have quite a bit of admins. Now, on to actually applying for adminship. I personally feel like we should do elections instead of one person gets voted yes or no. "Hold up, Chasey! What the hell are you talking about!? No more voting!?" Bare with me here. So, let's be real here. As soon as someone hits the right amount of edits, the first thing they're going to do is apply for a job. That's the way it's always been. So, why don't we do an election to see who would be best fitted for a job? "That's not fair! Everyone should be allowed to apply!" But does that mean everyone should apply? Yep, I'm throwin' some serious shade, y'all. The reason I think Elections would be better suited is because we need someone on the admin team is actually going to help and not just allow their rights to collect dust. And believe me, when I say there have been quite a bit of users who did exactly that... Anyway, elections allow multiple users to see who would be best fitted for the job. That way, we won't give adminship to an ass-load of people and who clearly aren't going to do their job and aren't even fitted at all to do said job. So, how will Elections work? Well, more than one user (it can be any amount; just not one) will apply for a job and other users will do the same. It's actually like a presidential election campaign. There will be a forum with numerous questions and each candidate has to answer some questions that are very similar to the ones on the AdminApplication template. Then, when it's time to vote, there will be discreet document created so that no one will know who voted who, except the ballot holder. And there will be no more supports/opposes with no explanation as to why they should receive this job. So yeah, Elections aren't that bad of an idea, eh?  Inactive Admins I am well aware that not everyone is going to be on 24/7, all day everyday. I fully understand that. But, if you're an admin and you aren't here for at least 2 months without saying anything? That's a problem. If you're an inactive admin and aren't here/active for 2 months without any notice or anything... you will be stripped of your rights. No exceptions. Unless you are without internet for an entire 2 months (which we all know that is unlikely), you have no excuse.  Radnomly promoting users? Okay, we are all (to some extent) guilty of this. I gave Bureaucrat rights to Britton a year ago, Elissa gave chat mod rights to 1ME, Randomz once gave chat mod rights to Josh, Britton once gave some rights to Deadly, etc. Understood. We have all been guilty of giving rights to another user without the community's consent. Which is a huge no-no. But, now that we're buckling down and making sure that if you get rights, YOU EARN THEM. No more random promotions, no more "oh you're my friend, here ya go"'s, NONE OF IT. And I personally want to apologize for giving away rights when my main goal was to stop it. My bad, I swear it won't happen again. That's why, I would like to propose the "3 strikes you're out" thing here. Sound good? Great!  Admins playing their part Okay, so the very fabulous 1MysteriousEnigma proposed that we need to get all our admins to play their part. THIS IS NOT MEANT TO OFFEND ANYONE! Which she is right, not every admin is being... well... an admin! I mean this is for those who don't contribute, don't help the wiki, and also allow their rights to collect dust. So, the lovely 1ME proposed that we have an Admin Evaluation! Basically to make sure that you didn't get your rights based on a popular opinion rather than actually being skilled with Wikia. Personally, I think this is a GENIUS idea! This part is mostly for her to take care of, but I thought it was such a great idea that we just have to include this. 
 * Randomly promote a user once - warning
 * Randomly promote a user again - warning and given a last chance
 * Randomly promote a user again - rights removed, blocked for a week