Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 566:

I don't have very strong feelings on this, but would lean to leaving it be. RFA's are a discussion, and we set a ''minimum'' time on them so that there is an opportunity for many editors to contribute - keeping in mind that some editors may only contribute once a week, such as on weekends. This is similar to almost all other discussion we have, for basically the same reason. — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] ^{[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]} 21:05, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Tony and Xaosflux on flexibility being one of the characteristics of Wikipedia discussions. We shouldn't give incentive to editors to drop in last-minute comments before a hard deadline. I am sympathetic to the stresses of those who feel they are being evaluated in public for a week. To me it would be better to address this root cause. The [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Proposals#Closed: 8B Admin elections|admin elections proposal made last year]] (that had a significant majority in favour but was not enacted) is one possible approach. (On a side note, although I appreciate there was no negative intent, I don't think comparing those volunteering to perform administrative tasks to kindergartners is apt.) [[User:Isaacl|isaacl]] ([[User talk:Isaacl|talk]]) 22:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)