User:Fauzan/RFAQ

Problem

 * 1) RFAs
 * 2) Too few successful RFAs lately
 * 3) The current status is not good for the future of adminship on enwiki
 * 4) Admin backlog is high

Cause

 * 1) Process
 * 2) RFA is more of a vote than consensus
 * 3) The voter base consists of a large number of immature/trolls/fans/drive by voters which changes the outcome significantly
 * 4) RFA is difficult to pass for relatively new contributors:
 * 5) High edit count standards
 * 6) Community wants a candidate to give time for understanding of policies to sink in
 * 7) Community wants more scrutiny of candidates after bad apples like Wifione
 * 8) RFA is difficult to pass for candidates who've spent the time spent by an average successful candidate
 * 9) Singling out of past mistakes
 * 10) Contributions are slanted towards a particular topic/namespace
 * 11) RFA is difficult to pass for veteran editors
 * 12) Working in contentious areas earns a lot of wikienemies who turn up as a team at the candidate's RFA

Possible Solution

 * 1) Adapt the current system
 * 2) Encourage more participation at RFAs
 * 3) Create a minimum eligibility requirement for voters
 * 4) Drop the adminship bar (How?)
 * 5) Make a cratchat compulsory at the end of any RFA
 * 6) Create a new system
 * 7) Do away with the voting system, replace it with a section headed discussion about the candidate, thus leading to a better consensus.
 * 8) Representative democracy: Create an elected group of editors who will determine the consensus (Similar to cratchat)