On 2/19/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
Rich Holton wrote:
Jossi Fresco wrote:
On Feb 18, 2007, at 11:43 PM, Ray Saintonge
wrote:
The general solution that was suggested was to
loosen up the
extreme restrictions on becoming a sysop.
That is not a solution, Ray. That is the act of opening the
proverbial can of worms. Think of the consequences.
What consequences, Jossi? If "editors can do
as much as an admin besides deleting an article and closing AfDs", then
what possible consequences would there be in having many more admins?
The reality is that there are significant differences (far more than you
suggested) between admins and non-admins. Deleting, viewing, and
restoring articles, blocking and unblocking users, protecting and
unprotecting articles...those pop to mind quickly.
But even in that reality, the vague imperative to "think of the
consequences" is not helpful. If you believe there would be significant
consequences, please tell us about them.
Or as the editor of a dead-tree encyclopedia might say, "Think of the
consequences of letting just anybody edit."
Ec
The consequences that we should most consider, imo, are the consequences of
losing anybody because our adminship is so poorly thought out and so hostile
to the individual who doesn't live in cyberspace, both by creating a
position of privilege unavailable to these editors, adminship, and by
creating an exclusive group on Wikipedia that is oftentimes overtly hostile
to these part-time editors. It was possible, just because of this
atmosphere, to totally dismiss the possibility on this thread that I, as one
of these outsiders, could even make a contribution to Wikipedia. I do
volunteer charity work, in addition to spending time with family, job and
passion--no successful charitable organization that relies upon volunteers
should ever discredit people who have only a few hours to give.
What's great in Wikipedia is due to the huge variety of anybodies, not the
small exclusive group of admins, and creating a body of administrators who
are so incredibly like-minded, which is what the current RfA process and the
big deal about adminship create, is not conducive in the long run to making
Wikipedia a place where anybody can edit.
And the consequences of letting anybody edit are becoming clearer over
time. Here is one of anybody's edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sei_Whale
Don't forget to compare Britannica's article on the same subject.
KP