Board Thread:New Features/@comment-4151266-20150615172420/@comment-4151266-20150620230736

1. I didn't say those words exactly above, but I did say " Though, I should hope that if users had been appointed admins, they would be reliable and unbiased."

2. If a bureaucrat on a wiki is willing to hand out the role of admin to just anyone, then that wiki already has a huge issue. Even if not selected by the community, the admin should still be verified as being a reliable and trustworthy character. As for wiki adoptions, sure the admin could give themselves all the achievements, but then they could do so anyway just by using a bot and making meaningless edits over and over again.

3. I'd hope that the bureaucrat who appointed the admin would take away the admin's power if they were abusing the system. Or another admin would block them. If people were mad that an admin was controlling the achievements, then they would create a rule against doing so, thus giving them reason to block the admin. If an admin truly is controlling a wiki, then staff can be contacted.

My point in the end is that features should not be withheld just because some communities cannot police themselves. Admins should be the people who are keeping order, not the people causing chaos. Achievements really aren't the biggest target for rogue admins.