Thread:Merrystar/@comment-26493471-20160106114521/@comment-4551144-20160107015228

There are good reasons why they don't want the community to decide who's going to be a bureaucrat/admin (which is not just because they don't want to or they don't like that person). One example would be so that it doesn't get chances of disruption. If a founder feels they're ok with that user being a bureaucrat, then that be fine. It's up to them and decide on the powers. If they report the founder for violating the TOS and the community votes against that aren't allowed by their policy (like some obnoxious/disruptive dope policy violators who think they're abusing rights if we're not and making constructive edits under the wikia policy), then that's something the staff need to reject. Also, it's their decision of they want to leave and remove their own rights or not. In other words, they can do community consenses for constructive things like improve the site and such if the user rights votes isn't a choice. Some communities don't mind about rights votes, but they have to ensure any jerks who request unwanted demotion of an active founder to have the community oppose to it's request.