Difference between revisions of "Blog:Letting admins win Golden Homers"
Wikisimpsons - The Simpsons Wiki
m |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
=== Comments === | === Comments === | ||
*The Golden Homer is about good users anyway. Right now, the same users are being nominated over and over again. I'm pretty sure somewhere the rules stated something like, "Admins cannot be nominated as they are nearly always good editors." Lots of our normal are good editors too. It just makes no sense. {{User:Randomno/sig2}} 05:36, 5 April 2012 (EDT) | *The Golden Homer is about good users anyway. Right now, the same users are being nominated over and over again. I'm pretty sure somewhere the rules stated something like, "Admins cannot be nominated as they are nearly always good editors." Lots of our normal are good editors too. It just makes no sense. {{User:Randomno/sig2}} 05:36, 5 April 2012 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Blogs]] | ||
Revision as of 04:38, April 5, 2012
I think admins should be allowed to win Golden Homers, as he only difference they have from normal users is that they can edit protected pages. This wouldn't make them any better or worse than normal users. | 
| Talk | Contributions | Edit count | 05:33, 5 April 2012 (EDT)
Contents
Support (1)
- As the user who suggested this, I am of course supporting. | | Talk | Contributions | Edit count | 05:33, 5 April 2012 (EDT)
Neutral (0)
Oppose (1)
- Admins are admins. Isn't that a good enough achievement? --Fred (Talk • Contribs. • Editcount) 05:37, 5 April 2012 (EDT)
Comments
- The Golden Homer is about good users anyway. Right now, the same users are being nominated over and over again. I'm pretty sure somewhere the rules stated something like, "Admins cannot be nominated as they are nearly always good editors." Lots of our normal are good editors too. It just makes no sense. | | Talk | Contributions | Edit count | 05:36, 5 April 2012 (EDT)
