WikiIndex talk:Bureaucrats

Hi! I request adminship and cratship, but if is not good, only sysop...Erwin 08:59, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

Why do you need sysop rights - after about 22 edits? --Wolf | talk 11:09, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

For helping with spam, vandalism, deleting page with nonsens etc. Erwin 11:11, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

Erwin no. You are asking bureaucrat rights everywhere. It's not a toy! CartoonistHenning 12:46, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

I see. --Wolf | talk 14:01, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

I'm not crazy, I know it... \\Erwin 14:12, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

Yes, you are only a little impatient - let's see what time will bring. --Wolf | talk 14:42, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

Well, it looks like he didn't like to be told to wait, threw his toys out of his crib, and hasn't been seen again - Special:Contributions/Erwin!!! Patience is a virtue . . . Hoof Hearted • talk2HH 10:01, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

Disadvantages to giving Bureaucrat status to all sysops?

Would like to know what folks think they are. Best, MarkDilley

Hi Mark, keep in mind, that bureaucrats cannot only grant, but also revoke rights. The most important trait of a bureaucrat is their ability to act in a circumspectly and peaceful (I hope I made understandable English here). After all, I think a few more bureaucrats would be good. Regards --Wolf | talk 06:58, 31 January 2012 (PST)

Another reason why not to give bureaucrat status at the same time as sysop - existing 'crats need to be satisfied that a new sysop conducts their new duties in an appropriate manner - learn to walk before you can run and all that! Hoof Hearted • talk2HH 10:01, 8 September 2012 (PDT)

Bureaucrat rights are a dangerous thing to abuse, and as such it would not be the best course of action to entrust all sysops with bureaucrat access. That being said, our current list of crats shows 1-2 active users, 5 inactive users, and the web host. Another bureaucrat or two would not be a bad idea, as long as security is held in high importance. Elassint 8 September 2012