I have heard
this line of argument a few times now from people
advocating some form of quick and easy de-adminship without resorting to
arbitration. In general, I think we already readily give adminship to
those who are nominated, and anyone who has a close call on their first
try will normally pass overwhelmingly after waiting a month or two. I
invite anyone who believes the argument above to point me to a case
where having an easier de-adminship process would have made the
difference in the success of an adminship nomination.
We could be more generous in seeking out candidates and making
nominations, of course, but that's a different matter. There are many
good users out there who are just waiting for a nomination.
--Michael Snow
The process of getting an adminship is currently political, and religious,
with confession of past offenses, absolution by votes, self promotion of
past accomplishments and back slapping by cronies. It some ways it is a
bit unseemly. It should be automatic and an opportunity to serve rather
than for status. Many serve just as well or better within editing
privileges, although many admins make invaluable contributions to the
community and should feel a sense of accomplishment.
-- Silverback
Unsurprisingly, non-admins (particularly those who have had run-ins with
admins) complain regularly that it is too hard to become an admin, that the
de-adminning process is non-functional and instead needs to become almost
automatic at the first hint of controversy, and that this has resulted in
Wikipedia being inundated with rogue admins who spend most of their time
oppressing and violating the rights of simple, hard-working Wikipedians.
I suppose, to be fair, I must also note that it is generally the hundreds of
admins who feel that these kinds of charges are gross exaggerations at best.
Jay.