I personally would like to know what exactly is potentially barring two wikis of the same series to join (i.e. two Pokemon Wikis)
The idea that if, just as an example, Bulbapedia worked hard and got into NIWA first, before Pokewikimania (made up name for nonexistent Pokemon wiki), then Bulbapedia obviously expects certain benefits from being a NIWA member. Adding a second Pokemon wiki dilutes those benefits, and only does so for Bulbapedia, while all other wikis continue to enjoy their status as the only wiki for their franchise. To do this against the will of Bulbapedia would be completely irrational and unfair - it's simply about seniority. If Bulbapedia consented to Pokewikimania's inclusion, then the issue is completely negated. It's only to benefit the wiki that got here first. In the event of two wikis from one franchise trying to join at once, or even when another wiki tries to join of the same franchise as a member, we try to encourage merging. This way, ONE source benefits from ALL that both wikis have to offer. It's the best option as far as viewers go.
I have always supported the One-Wiki-Per-Franchise Policy in that it's up to the current member from that franchise. Zelda Wiki would have to give its consent to add a new wiki about Zelda, even if the rest of NIWA wanted to add that member. Super Mario Wiki I believe had to give its consent for Donkey Kong wiki to join - I could be remembering incorrectly. Someone else on staff feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that one.
As far as community goes, NIWA was never intended to govern its members or supplant their communities. One of the big things with Zelda Wiki is that Zelda Fansites operate it, and they each have their own communities that contribute to Zelda Wiki, and Zelda Wiki has its own community as well that does not replace any of those sites' communities. Similarly, Zelda Wiki's community remains distinctly separate from the forum community here. As a whole, though, they are all a part of the grand, all-inclusive "NIWA Community" and that's just the nature of what we've set up. If I had to compare it to a government, and I hate to, I'd say it's like a Confederation. However, we do not govern. NIWA does not enforce anything on its members. The only thing it does is protect its own reputation. Obviously, if NIWA wants someone to do something for "quality of reputation" then there is room for abuse. The simple solution is that we don't abuse it. I mean, how hard is that?
If that didn't make any sense, and I imagine parts of it made no sense, please don't hesitate to ask me to clarify. I've worked 16 hours in the last 48, and got about 2 hours of sleep between the two shifts.
It all makes sense to me, thanks a lot.
A better question other than "Why do we have so many staff" is "Does the fact that each wiki has different numbers of staff potentially throw off the balance of NIWA?"
I'm not terribly familiar with how matters are handled here at NIWA, but if a matter comes up, and each staff member is given one vote, then certain member wikis would get more say over the matter than others based solely on the fact that they have more staff. Are such matters given a "One vote per wiki" then?
I imagine they operate by some majority rule like 2/3 majority if they vote on these things, so that one wiki can't take over, but I doubt it truly works that way.