Anthère (but forced to be only Anthere on [[fr:]]) wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
>Being a sysop is only a status thing in the sense
that it means that
>you're trusted not to post obscene material on the homepage, to use
>certain destructive commands only in accordance with long-established
>custom, if at all, and that you'll help police against vandals in a
>gentle and caring way.
All being behaviors that anybody could follow, without
being necessary a sysop. Being gentle, caring, loving
and trusted, is not the prerogative of a sysop.
Indeed, all things that anybody could and should do.
But you can't become a sysop unless we *trust* that you will do them.
Thus, becoming a sysop indicates that such trust exists, a status bonus.
Not being a sysop hardly proves that such trust does *not* exist --
but it leaves open that possibility, so not a status bonus.
Still, you are right, we should ignore this status bonus.
Being a sysop is not meant to be a status thing.
-- Toby