Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-4984687-20150326211251/@comment-4544033-20150403211507

Ok, this is getting more heated then it should be. No matter your views on the old Admins, calling them names is not necessary nor healthy towards the repair of this wiki. No matter what they did, or how we feel about their leaving, anger and the continuing to spread it, will not make this place better no matter the policy. The community was built differently back then, this does not mean it was wrong, nor does it mean the admins being promoted was wrong. If an admin only got two votes on his nomination, that doesn't mean the system was wrong, that means the community didn't get involved, if the admin was bad then its not his fault that he got in.

I am not sure how voting will be fully removed from nominations. Its still a yes or no, even without the voting templates. The only way this could be done is if more trust was put into the admins and staff, as I will try to explain below. Even without the "voting" people will still be saying yes or no, so unless we set it up in such a way that having more people say yes doesn't matter, it could still be considered a "popularity contest".

Now, while I prefer trying to let the talks die down before ending them, we are at a point where we are just arguing. So here is what I see us needing and wanting done.


 * Staff nominations will no longer be used. The editor must instead apply for the role themselves.
 * Before applying, they need to meet the requirements of that position. applications that do not meet all requirements will be closed and rejected.
 * As with staff before, editor given rights through applications are subject to the same rules and requirements, and are still subject to the repercussions of trying to bypass them.
 * Editors can show either approval or opposition to the nomination by commenting the application. They are asked to give full reasoning why, and refrain from just saying "yes" or "what he said".  For staff applications to work, we need community involvement.
 * To be approved, that nominee in question must show they are not only ready for the responsibility, but that they are trusted by the community. If unable to, the application will be rejected.
 * Administrators will watch over the application. It is their job to go over the comments and (for lack of a better word at this time) votes from the community.  They will decide if this person has proven they can be trusted, and are trusted by the community.