I'm honored that you all like my staff election procedures. But these procedures have yet to be finalized. I just gave a suggestion and now everyone is acting like they are the official rules. When I made the post, I was hoping that other people would suggest their own ideas for selecting staff, instead everyone just kinda accepted what I said. Before these procedures become official, we actually have to vote on them as a community. Before we vote, though, we should have a discussion about the exact form of the finalized rules. For example, should we add in other requirements than nomination such as edit count or time passed since joining? Should we set a limit on the number of staff members at any one time? Should we require that a user already be a mod before becoming and admin? If so, for how long? What about removing staff right? Etc, Etc. It is a lot better to have these rules set out now than to create them when they become necessary.
As you discuss these things, remember that we want to be a community lead wiki, not a staff lead wiki. There are many staff teams on online communities that claim that they listen to their communities, but that does not make them community lead. For a wiki to be community lead, it is not enough that the staff listen to their community, they must obey their community. If they disagree with the consensus of their community, they cannot say "I disagree with this decision, but I'll follow it anyway because I'm a good staff member". Instead they must say "I disagree with this decision, but I'll follow it anyway because I am obligated by my duty as a staff member to serve the will of the community". Here's a good quote. "There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." Luckily, none of the current staff team are like this. But we should still try to make rules that will guard against these sorts of people taking power in the future.