Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-5619531-20140815212156/@comment-5643552-20140816181329

Rollback is a very minor position and it's silly to require them to have such a level of devotion to the wiki. One or two inactive/semi-active rollbacks never hurt anyone. I mean, sure, if over half the rollbacks haven't made an edit in like a year, maybe they should be demoted. But I don't think this seems like something worth making a rule over. It could very easily be handled at the discretion of bureaucrats.

I highly doubt any of the current bureaucrats would just up and leave for six months without leaving a notice of retirement and/or stepping down first unless they died. If this was a big problem then maybe making it a rule would be necessary, but it isn't. So why bother?

In short: for being needless rule additions that would do nothing but overcomplicate things. We don't need to make a rule for everything.