14,549
edits
Forum:Shifts: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
:Even if this actually manages to pass it wouldn't work for long, we would soon see "could you cover me for this day" etc. and then the system collapses. --<span style="font-weight: bold">[[User:Sovereign92|<span style="color: #00FF7F">So</span>]][[User talk:Sovereign92|<span style="color: #00FF00">ve</span>]]</span> 20:20, December 20, 2010 (UTC) | :Even if this actually manages to pass it wouldn't work for long, we would soon see "could you cover me for this day" etc. and then the system collapses. --<span style="font-weight: bold">[[User:Sovereign92|<span style="color: #00FF7F">So</span>]][[User talk:Sovereign92|<span style="color: #00FF00">ve</span>]]</span> 20:20, December 20, 2010 (UTC) | ||
::I'm here everyday too, albeit a day here and there, maybe one a month. Neumannz, Kryten, and myself are all able to handle bans pretty well over our time schedule. In addition, Azul81677 is a frequent IRC-goer who can be queried for administrative purposes. Also, what is this call for shifts? Has there been a spike of vandalism? Has a new game been released that causes a lot of false or misnomer information to appear on the wiki? No to neither of these. I've hardly had to ban any users at all, aside from a certain ten sockpuppets. Besides that, I can't remember the last time I had to ban someone. | |||
Also, forcing admins to only work certain shifts? That's preposterous and could never be organized to prevent the other admins from working during those shifts. It seems to me these "times of weaknesses" in our schedules are also times when editing goes down as well, so the wiki is not in an incredible, or perhaps even noteworthy amount of danger during the absence of admins because that ''we need to sleep''. | |||