User blog comment:Sheepman/This is the terning point (READ)/@comment-1823154-20101003210153/@comment-1823154-20101004035009

>There is not an overflow of admins in my opinion

Oh really?

If you check Special:ListUsers, you will see that currently on this wiki, we have; And look at how small our userbase is. Every single active editor seems to be an administrator. Too many chiefs, not enough indians. It's insane, and its led to several problems. Half of the sysops don't even know how to be a sysop correctly, and some people seem to be using their powers for themselves rather than the community in general.
 * 11 Rollbacks
 * 24 Sysops
 * 12 Bureaucrats

If we move the site, I'd be more than willing to give people a shot at administrator, but if they fail at it then they'll get demoted. I want real, unbiased, fair administrators. I want administrators that mediate discussions and solve problems rather than yelling, flaming, and fuelling a problem rather than solving it.

Its a community decision whether or not they want me in power for the new site. If they want me to help fix community problems then I'm your man, but if they don't want me to be an administrator then fair enough I'll step down. However, if I'm in power, I'll only promote those who look promising enough, not those who can simply apply for adminship and then get voted in via either their popularity status, or threaten to quit if they don't get their powers.