The Cunctator wrote:
I can't speak for George (the OP), but I
don't think I'm working from
the assumption that we're doing anything wrong. I come to the conclusion
that we do.
Okay, how have you come to that conclusion?
I've already explained this elsewhere, so I'll only give a quick summary
here. Wikipedia does something _right_ by letting everyone edit. The
underlying philosophy is that everyone starts out as innocent, and is
blocked from editing only if they show misbehaviour. Adminship is the
wrong way around. Users start out as being viewed with caution and
suspicion, and must "earn" their admin "privileges" by fulfilling
some
ridiculous set of criteria. The _right_ way would be to demote the ones
who misuse it, not to prevent the constructive ones from being
constructive.
Oh, I agree with that. I just was saying I don't think admins getting burned
out and taking a wikibreak is necessarily a huge problem.