Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25206135-20170807030616/@comment-32974000-20170807041316

Yesterday once more wrote: There is also a case where some users will often help other wikis and are often active, and can also fire those administrators who maliciously sabotage wikileaks.

This seriously confused me. FANDOM, powered by Wikia, is not Wikileaks. Why would you want to fire admins who sabotage Wikileaks? Removing an admin is a way different topic just as Wikileaks is by itself. Just becuase someone is on Wikileaks doesn't mean you can "fire" them on a totally different thing like a wikia. How can you even know or find out if someone is both on Wikileaks and Wikia as the same person?

Also, most wikis don't need an active admin team to thrive. Some do well for themselves. An inactive admin team never means an inactive community. That's where adoption comes in, which, again, is a way different topic. New admins can help a community grow.