Community Activity:Should we have two Bureaucrats

Put your opinions down below.

Rules
These will be order by priority. Admins may take action on any violators.
 * You cannot respond to anyone else's opinions.
 * You cannot make sentences irrelevant to the topic.
 * You cannot go against anyone on this page.
 * You cannot change anyone's sentences.

Positive Elixir Trade
I think that we should not have two Bureaucrats because our current staff is enough to handle anything that comes our way. We have FOUR admins already. Why should we change our balance of power if nothing bad is coming out of it?

Besides, I cannot think of any managerial privileges a bureaucrat would have that an admin doesn't. We should always keep everyone's user ranks as low as functionally possible.

ToPhu
I don't necessarily agree with having two bureaucrats, but I do agree to have someone trustworthy to be temporarily when the current one is inactive, such as granting them the permission and then taking it away when the current is inactive.

Golden
There will be a new mod and then a new admin. It will be chaos again.

FancyPants
Yeh

Martsays
Don'tcha think we have too many staff? At least 2/3 of the current active wiki are mods, admins, and crat.

Maple
There should not be two crats. The point is to have one leader. Like with our prime minister.

P-dog
Eh its a decent idea and I think it could actually work nowadays

Ak
Maybe.

Awq

Idk

ZOMBOSS
Yes. Only if one of them is me.

Bignatebaseball
I think we should have two because that way if something happens to one of them the other can fill in while they're gone. Also there could be a second opinion

Zach
I think there should be two because they can work together to make important decisions and make the wiki a better place. I also think it's important to have two instead of one because then they can contradict each other's opinions and represent the community more.

Neptune
I think we should have two because of multiple reasons.

1. the wiki has had two in the past, why not now. the wiki users number hasnt really changed (edited)

2. It would be good to have a back-up leader

3. If one is currently inactive, the other can take over forn a while

4. Designsion making would be much easier

5. We could make less mistakes, like for example when we made pl admin, that was a mistake. But with two buerucats, we could avoid something similar in the future.

TAC
I may not be the most experiences on this wiki, but I certainly am experienced with FANDOM, seeing many wikis grow.

I think more staff to help out more to a wiki will bring more good to the wiki than bad. PET at the Big Nate Wiki at some points had to work very hard, but things would go much more efficiently when me or Hasan987 where there, so PET didn’t have to work as hard, and that someone else could help out.

Also, a second bureaucrat can bring new ideas to the table that can help the wiki tremendously, maybe a competition idea, or a new feature, whatever it is.

FancyPants
What Zach said

Henry Hudson
Just like the American Federal government, power on the Big Nate Comments Wiki should be checked. One bureaucrat could possess too much power, and turn the wiki into an unwanted tyranny.

Additionally, nobody is perfect. Swasimcool isn't very proficient in CSS, and adding another bureaucrat (such as P-dog or Neptune) could fix that.

yodaa
why not also this page is dumb lol

Obi-Wan
A wise man once said there should only be two no more no less. But no there should only be one.

Aee23
I think we should because they can work together to maintain peace. Two heads are more than half of one. As long as they can work together, or if not, stay away, it is definitely a good idea.

-No Avatar-
Double the management so sure!

Chase
If one of them is biased, the other one won't be, most probably. It's a great idea in my opinion

Vecna
there should only be one bureaucrat. And that is me.

Jk there should be two so that they can work together to make this place better.

Ash6861
yes so that they can keep eachother in check and just in case something happens to the other