Board Thread:Wiki Management/@comment-5407503-20141115040026/@comment-24860884-20141115045220

DeathZombi wrote: In my opinion I feel mixed about removing staff limitations.

While it create a balanced system for staff as their is spread responsibilities, sometimes the limitation is just too restricting (7 rollbacks?) and some other users don't get the chance to state why they can get those rights. I mean, some users deserve to have staff positions as they earned it.

But removing the staff limitation can create an excess of users so why don't we expand the limitation so that it is just enough for more users to get rights?

1. Rollbacks: About 10-14 positions

2. Chat Moderator: About 8-12 positions

Administrator: About 8-12 positions

3. Bureaucrat: About 8-10 positions

(This is just a suggestion so if you like this idea but don't feel the numbers are correctly balanced, you can change them.)

Rollbacks have the most positions as they don't have as much rights as the higher ranks. Also asking for Rollback rights are the most common for staff promotions.

Chat Moderators and Administrators, I feel are the middle ranks as they get an increase in rights and trust but they aren't superior as they can be demoted if power abuse comes in play. So they share the same amount of positions. They both have seldom promotions.

Bureaucrat has the least positions as it is the most trustworthy position. It does take time for bureaucrats to apply so seeing bureaucrat promotions are uncommon.

This is my opinion but if this does not work, another solution is to work a compromise between users. If a staff position is full and someone wants to be a rollback or some other position, they can share rights with a user as long as it is okay with them and they agree to work together. Like this user gets this week and that user gets next week. While trust will form between the two, this might not be that great of an idea, so I might need to hear some people's voice about this...

I thank you for your time and patience. I like it except for the time shareish idea. But, I can't see a better thing to change it to. Besides that,  I agree with most things of what you said.