Forum:CT Archive/Admin age exception

Let's face it: in the past couple of years, a number of users have come along who have simply blown most of us out of the water when it comes to positive contribution to the site. Young users brought in with new media such as Star Wars: The Clone Wars and Fate of the Jedi have become some of the site's most prolific authors and highest-quality reviewers, not to mention numerous younger users that patrol the recent changes, doing everything they can to combat vandalism and fanon without sysops rights. Last, but certainly not least, most of the users that come to mind are also possessed of a very measured temperament.

Forum:CT Archive/Admin Age from late 2006 established the minimum admin age of 18 years. At the January 2009 Mofference, the minimum age was debated, and it was decided to create a two-year service time exception for admin candidates that were under 18.

Administrators currently states:
 * "&hellip;all potential candidates are required to be either of adult age (18+) or have at least two years' experience of consistent, quality editing to the site."

Requests for user rights currently states:
 * "They either are of adult age (18 years or older) or have two years' worth of solid contribution to the site."

I am of the personal opinion that the minimum admin age is completely unnecessary: no candidate could secure election with 2/3 of both admin and user votes without being qualified. I feel that a number of more personal motives, such as ageism and the desire to keep the administration closed to younger users who are just as qualified as the site's oldest, are at play when people try to impose 18 years, or effectively 15 or 16 with the service time exception. There have been many users that have come along who were more than ready for adminship before the exception time was up, often at times when admin activity was at a low and new admins were required to serve the ever-growing community.

However, I do understand the sentiments expressed by those who outright oppose doing away with the limit, based on personal experience of my own growth during my adolescence. For this reason I am proposing a less sweeping adjustment to our policies to better fit, in my opinion, the growing trend of extremely qualified young users on the site that would be of much help when awarded sysops rights. I ask that a change in the exception service time from 2 years to 1.5 years be considered. The wording in the mentioned policy pages would remain the same save for the change in numbers. Graestan ( Talk ) 01:55, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Change service exception to 1.5 years

 * 1) This would open up adminship to users who move very quickly to the elite and could be of great assistance. Broadening the pool from which to draw administrators can only increase the possibility of better candidates being considered as opposed to the approach of "well, who do we have that's acceptable" when admins are needed to maintain the growing site. Graestan ( Talk ) 01:55, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2)  IFYLOFD  ( Floyd's crib ) 01:59, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Interesting idea.  JangFett  (Talk) 02:06, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
I'm not going to ask that people not create more voting options, but frankly I think it would be counterproductive to either slam the door shut or throw it wide open. Graestan ( Talk ) 01:55, May 29, 2010 (UTC)