Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-29818919-20161012170921/@comment-6532078-20161013202539

First of all, sorry for being inactive for so long. You never know when life and other commitments come to kick you. I actually agree with you all - having an active admin who can check over the wiki at least a few times a week would be very beneficial for the wiki if you don't want to message someone who is clearly busy for every simple thing such as updating the main page or notifications. It's only natural. Also having someone of "higher status" does wonders with some users, especially vandals, but that's entirely different subject.

What II'm not exactly sure about is if having every active member as an admin would bring anything good or simply create even more mess and disputes. The wiki used to be far more active than now without it but times and people change so. I don't feel confident or comfortable in giving my vote to anyone other than Taka because honestly, he's the only editor I know out of you and I trust him a lot with the wiki stuff but I won't oppose to anyone else either; choose as you think is the best for the wiki.

Another matter you mentioned is that only admins can decide how to let the wiki evolve. Maybe it sounds weird coming from an admin but what I learned from here that it's not the status that's most important but what people contribute. If you have any ideas, great! Just start a discussion anywhere and ask for opinions. If other editors agree with them, ask me, DancingFairy or whoever gets the admin rights/is around then and follow with it! Of course, checking with admins is also important but if all you want the rights is for making decisions then I don't believe that your motivation is on point. I understand your point to get bureaucrats rights even less - they exist only to promote others. And as far as I can see, DancingFairy is still around when needed so? Do we really need 5 admins and 3 bcrats with 5 active editors? Really? (basically, if we need 5 leaders among 5 editors then what's the point of having a leader in the first place?)

And one more important question which I'd like you to think thoroughly about: for how long can you commit? Look, I've been on this wiki for years and one and very normal thing is that even the most active editors are around for only a couple of months. Besides me and Taka ( sometimes Vely when I bother her ) no one else stayed around from the old days of the wiki. New people showed up, did good (or bad, depends) things and left without a notice the next day. It's normal. You have to be prepared for it. When I started to be less and less active it wasn't even because I got very busy but because I was literally the only active editor for some time. And it's really not fun then. Well, now I'm really really busy and that's even less fun but I'll leave personal things aside.

I might be an old lady by now who doesn't follow what's trending on the wikis rn so I'm looking forward to seeing your replies. But for now, I'll hold off with making big decisions.