Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/DF08

I don't know the user, so I can't comment in any way on their suitability for admin. I just want to note that I wish we'd stop creeping up the level of edits necessary -- 1500, in my opinion, is not "relatively few". I have continued to support users with less than 1,000 edits, and I hope we haven't gotten to the point where even 1,500 is below the community's requirements. Sorry for being a little off-topic, but I saw the comment in the nomination and felt compelled to reply. Jwrosenzweig 05:01, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I must say that I disagree with you, James. Whilst I'd probably term 1,500 "somewhat few" rather than "relatively few", I don't usually support candidates with fewer than 1,500 edits.  I just don't see how a user with that number of edits can be very well acquainted with the project and our policies and our community. BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 22:14, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I know we disagree, blankfaze -- I respect your position and understand it (while not sharing it). But I don't feel it's a position that even the majority of users hold at this point.  Perhaps I was wrong, and regardless, I may have been wrong in raising the issue here -- it certainly isn't my intention to skew this vote in any direction, or to needlessly distract from this candidate's merits.  Thanks for providing the balance of the other perspective. :-) Jwrosenzweig 23:04, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * It would seem to me that the best way to be aquainted with policy is reading, not writing. We currently have no way of measuring the extent that people have read and understood policy and how the community works. People's interactions are a crude approximation, but surely it's quality not quantity that we're aiming to measure there? I admit I don't really understand what you think the extra 500 edits is going to tell you. Maybe if you articulated what you felt each specific candidate hadn't demonstrated in your comments when you vote, rather than making a blanket statement that they don't meet your requirements, people would better understand your position. Sorry if this is getting a bit off-topic! Shane King 01:43, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Please consider expressing your views at Requests for adminship/Standards. &mdash;Lowellian (talk)  02:37, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)