User blog comment:Zane T 69/Wiki Improvements/@comment-778071-20160626023744/@comment-5179743-20160628012234

@Caleb. First, I wasn't trying to insult you. I stated that inactive admins were of no use to the wiki, you made excuses that they should only be desyopped for security reasons. In my mind they're elected officials who play golf instead of working at the office. Yes, what I said was somewhat mean spirited, I was wrong to say that. I just felt you were enabling the problem, we have all these people who don't do their job, and your saying they should keep the job, they don't do. It was early, I was doing research for my debate with you, I was frustrated. Then I had this random idea pop in my head, 'they must be his friends'. So in my tiredness I just put that in, and quite frankly. I doubt anyone would go to their talkpages and even scim the contents just to prove a friendship, for a theory they spoke of.

Yes they are volunteers, and unpaid. Not even getting a dollar as a symbolic salary. Yes you are volunteers but your also the equivalents of Vice President/Presidents. I believe you should be active to deal with the day-to-day management. I believe Admins/b-crats should be held to a higher standard, and try to live up that standard.

To use your own point against you: " Why would we want to sysop anyone who is bordering on inactivity and seems uninterested in contributing to the Wiki." Why would we want any to remain a sysop if they wont use those powers for the benefit of the community. The needs/wants of the few. (Sysops/B-Crats.) Don't count more than the needs of the many, regular users. The question is, and has been why do we keep them sysopped. Because you don't prioritize the over-all wiki, the many, over the few. We need more admins, rollbacks, we have plenty admins, 50% don't contribute. They need to be replaced and demoted.

And we aren't talking months of activity, were talking 2-8 years in no activity for some. Excessive.

This seems to be more of a debate of leadership styles, and beliefs. We can spend years debating it, or we can let the community decide, with my RFA nomination. Because I do plan on proposing, a wiki wide vote, to demote inactive admins, if thats possible.

I believe community elected positions, should be filled with people willing to serve that community. To prioritize that community, and if they can't do that, then they need to step aside for someone who will. That's what people will get if I become Admin.

I believe we should end our debate, it seems to be getting close to an argument, in part due to my ill thought out comment, my belief that essential personnel should be more active. I hope, you'll support my RFA, I doubt you will though. My comments reflect my beliefs to an extent, and how I plan to behave as an Sysop, should I become one. Mainly, not betraying the community who elected me, and If I can't remain active, resigning.