Quote Originally Posted by Odin
Was that in reply to Tosa Andres? I assume he knows what the Faq says and his questions were not rhetorical (at least they didnt read that way to me, hence my reply).

Since you decided to enter into the conversation with a valid point of reference lets have a look at it. This definition is vague at best. that in itself is part of the problem because what determines if someones participation makes it a better place?

The Faq you posted dosent state that there is a specific entity that makes that determination, not only that but an Admin is asking .

With notions like "fine" and "honourable" those are subjective. One could even look at your reply to this thread as a less then honorable endevor given the context of your post, in relation to the expressed desire of the admin posting.

I dont believe that to be the case, but the overall point is its vague and very subjective. Status quo seems to be okay, I dont see many people whinning about senior member status but if an Admin is asking then why not offer something new, or outside of the definition already applied?
AIUI, from previous threads on the subject (the topic comes up every now and then), the moderators get together every so often to nominate and discuss candidates for promotion, and a limited few are duly promoted. If my experience in the TWC's CdeC is any guide, the discussion is entirely subjective, yet, because it's a process involving human scrutiny and not just automatic qualification by numbers, it's rigorous but fair, flexible enough to include many areas of contribution but strict enough to weed out undesirables.