Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Brainstorming: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
John Cline (talk | contribs) →Discussion (Admin-ability to block an admin from using their tools): ce; do far → so far |
→Discussion (Sortition): love it |
||
Line 321:
* Just throwing it out there. If you want to get more candidates to run, maybe change it from an opt-in system to an opt-out one. Commenters will have to proceed explicitly knowing the candidate did not ask to be nominated for adminship which could make them less hostile. Though, I can't help find the idea rather silly, I'm also weirdly fond of it? –<span style="font-family:CG Times, times">[[User:MJL|<span style="color:black">MJL</span>]] [[User talk:MJL|‐'''Talk'''‐]]<sup>[[User:MJL/P|☖]]</sup></span> 20:18, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
*: This method could solve the level of scrutiny problem as multiple candidates could be selected at once, and candidates could just ignore the process if they felt like it. Though it technically is still an RFA, it provides an alternative to the current traditional route (which I imagine will still be there). –<span style="font-family:CG Times, times">[[User:MJL|<span style="color:black">MJL</span>]] [[User talk:MJL|‐'''Talk'''‐]]<sup>[[User:MJL/P|☖]]</sup></span> 20:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
* I absolutely love this. It should be easy to develop some kind-of algorithmic test pulling in certain criteria (i.e. X# of edits, less than X# blocks, % match on XFD !votes, etc.) to generate lists of candidates. [[User:Chetsford|Chetsford]] ([[User talk:Chetsford|talk]]) 21:24, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
| |||