On 2/4/06, The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/4/06, Jay Converse <supermo0(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/4/06, The Cunctator
Oh, lordy! The unwashed masses! Quick, defend the
citadel. Being an
admin really ain't that amazing.
Except for the simple fact that they can delete images, which cannot be
restored. All it takes is one bad apple to completely destroy
images, unless they're stopped in time.
That's true now, isn't it?
And we all know how hard it is to remove an admin
once he's there.
That's because becoming an admin isn't automatic.
You're completely avoiding both my points. If you give everyone a gun, all
it takes is one person to fire a shot for the whole town to erupt in a blaze
of gunfire. If you give trustworthy people, a small portion of them, guns,
then those people become a symbol of trust and honesty to everyone else.
Obviously guns are a bit of an extreme comparison...
Also, by using circular logic on the second point, you're ignoring the fact
that it seems to be generally thought that the current de-adminship process,
which relies on admins not coming in hundreds at a time, is already broken,
and you want to flood it even further. You're saying that by adding more
people to be looked over, the already bogged-down system will magically fix
I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.