--- The Cunctator cunctator@kband.com wrote:
On Wed, 2003-03-19 at 10:48, Anthere wrote:
I like the terminology user.
Because I feel it is also possible to benefit from having an account as a *reader* only (so... as a user...)
(mostly for the watch list - especially in those
times
of painful research through google)
A simple reader would maybe not have the
compulsion of
creating an account if it is named "editor".
I have to say here that I'm in disagreement.
"user" connotes a producer-consumer relationship (I create, you use; I sell, you buy; I produce, you consume) in its standard computer-lingo meaning ("lusers" vs "hackers" or "coders"), compounded by its association with the more common usage as shorthand for "drug user".
quite true
Wherease "editor" connotes stewardship, power, collaboration (because to edit you need to build on someone else's work)--and therefore some responsibility, yes. But is that so bad? We want participants in Wikipedia to feel a sense of stewardship, power, collaboration, and responsibility.
Also true but 'editor' excludes 'reader' in its meaning. I think it wrong.
"contributor" is similarly a better word than "user", if you really dislike "editor".
Contributor is the best of the three, as anyone can contribute in reading, or writing, or commenting, or developing the soft, or raising money...
strong point of 'user' : it's short and easy to write :-)
Une contributrice
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com