User talk:Kmweber/Servantship Reform

There are really two parts to this proposal.

1. The continuing vote after appointment. I very much support this aspect, even if we do nothing with it. It would be great if any admin could go to his page for this, if only to get a reality check about the way that he is doing his job. The one's with low support may be inspired to improve their behaviour just to get a better rating. We are bound also to get retaliatory votes, but they too will tend to a statistical balance.
2. What to do when someone falls below the threshold. I have the same concerns as many others about this. If it creates a bureaucratic nightmare it isn't worth it. The last thing we need is something else to waste people's time. If the first part of this proposal makes it we should really wait to see how the results shape up before trying to find a solution.Eclecticology (talk) 08:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

dissatisfaction

The difficulty I see with the proposal is that anyone having a disagreement with the servant will be motivated to vote him out, while those liking his actions will not be sufficiently motivated to register support. Thus someone who gets involved in any kind of disputes will very quickly lose their place (at least one side of the argument will be unhappy). Even if they then re-nominate for appointment, this will lead to an enormous amount of time spent re-electing everyone. Moreover, no doubt factions will appear who simply support each other automatically and thereby exclude outsiders, even if the outsiders can get regular support from the community as a whole. Sandpiper (talk) 09:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)