On 3/20/07, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
I don't attribute any malice to Jimbo, or anyone else for that matter. But clearly, there is widespread confusion about Jimbo's role in Wikipedia that needs resolving. Perhaps I could pose some questions for the audience:
I don't think this line of questioning is helpful. Jimbo's role in the community is based not just on his early leadership but his respect and trust by the community *at large. His position is one of *trust, and In order for his role to have meaning, this role needs to remain largely undefined and unconstrained by any set boundaries or constitutional delineations. He can negate consensus, simply because he can, as he has in the past, and as he will continue to for as long as he is active.
-Stevertigo