User talk:DangerousPanda/Admin Reform

Arbcom
Bypass arbcom for removal. Give to the crats or community. AC has become totally ineffective in controlling admins and they take waaaay too long. Pumpkin Sky  talk  19:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Pumpkin. Perhaps some of the best potential RFA candidates shouldn't want a permanent position for life. If the role is taken seriously, it shouldn't be something you take on as a status symbol, but as a stint of extra (and often difficult) work for a limited period, renewable under the right circumstances. And really, I don't know why we have crats if they're not trusted to do more in managing adminship. BWilkins, thanks for preparing the page. I'd like to see an emphasis, even in the standard questions asked at RFAs, on the candidate's self-perceived ability to deal with disputes between editors (especially long-standing editors) by mediating, counselling, cautioning, rather than blocking. Social cohesion should be one of the key aims of adminship. Tony   (talk)  04:26, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You saw the link to User:Bwilkins/RFA2/RFA_Core_Questions? (✉→ BWilkins ←✎) 10:04, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I hadn't. Good, but I'm a minimalist, because I worry that people won't read more than a para at a time. I'd push Q8 back to second position; I'd consider binning Q2 and Q9 (will they yield useful information?). Tony   (talk)  11:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)