"

I sampled Special:Listadmins.  Admins 200-209 and 300-309. 
200
 Jun 21, 2005
 Jun 20, 2005
 Apr 30, 2005 (prior,  Feb 17)
 Jun 21, 2005
 Jun 21, 2005
 Dec 10, 2004
 Jan 23, 2005
 Jun 20, 2005
 Sep 21, 2004
 Jun 15, 2005 (prior Jun 9)

300
 Jun 20, 2005
 May 19, 2005
 Jun 17, 2005
 Jun 21, 2005
 Jun 19, 2005 
 Jun 20, 2005 
 Jun 20, 2005
 Jun 21, 2005
 Apr 25, 2005 (prior Mar 8)
 May 31, 2005 (prior May 11)

12 active, 8 inactive or slightly active = 60% active

If this is roughly accurate, then the number of active admins is probably around 300 or less. (I don't know how many total editors were active in the last 30 days). While some admins involve themselves in setting policies (which anyone may participate in), others seem to confine themselves to truly janitorial work. For that reason I'm not sure if ""bureaucracy"" is the best way to describe the corps of admins, or the dangers threatened by their expansion. The more plausible fear, I think, is that too many admins will result in a ""police state"", with more sped-up deletes, heavy-handed blocks, and POV enforcement. I am certainly opposed to any movement in the direction of stifling unpopular POVs. I'm not sure that the number of admins is the major factor though. Another view, which I don't endorse either, is that having more admins broadens involvement and reduces the relative power of any one admin. I think that the most important issues are probably the rules and procedures, official and unofficial, that admins follow and/or enforce on others, Those powers should stay limited. - 05:26, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

Also- Thanks for your support for my adminship. Maybe we should limit the number of admins to 500. ;) Cheers, - 05:26, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)"