Thread:GorillaMan/@comment-5754239-20150323034845/@comment-27158281-20150324220543

Barnswallow wrote: Iron, DragonRainbow, thanks for the vote of confidence. As someone who admins and co-admins communities on other platforms and therefore uses different terminology, I think some of the confusion come from the fact that the terms bureaucrat and administrator are not clearly defined or understood in the same way by everybody (and also because each wiki has its own organization even if the positions have the same names). What being one or the other entail in terms of responsibilities, tasks and long-term commitment? How active must one or the other be? Why would one want to be one or the other and how is this going to benefit **this** wiki? When Iron asked me if I wanted to become an admin and I said yes I accepted because I thought this community lacked a solid rotation of people who could take care of day-to-day management such as taking care of spam and inappropriate comments, making sure people's questions were answered, welcoming newbie editors, making sure the wiki provided correct and up-to-date information, things were in the correct place, etc. and I could help with that. If that's not what this about or is not something other people are willing to do too then I'm not sure I want to step up to the plate. It does seem to me that's not what everybody speaks about here (and there's clearly other matters to take care of that I haven't mentioned and which probably are different responsibilities altogether) and I'm also very uneasy about some things that have been said. Again because intent and roles have not clearly been defined imo. I think it would useful if that were the case. What things are you uneasy about?