On 2/9/07, Timwi timwi@gmx.net wrote:
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.