doc wrote:
Personally I could agree that the power to
"remove reviewer right" could
be restricted to some special class of user, but only if the power to
"grant reviewer right" is subject to even more scrutiny.
If reviewer right is wrongly removed - we'll have the internal problem
of an upset editor (big deal? not - get over it!), however if it is
granted to someone who misuses it then it breaches our quality control
and can damage living people.
In other words it seems that you feel that it's worth it to punish the
innocent to soothe your paranoia that some stranger might do damage.
I really have little sympathy for those more concerned
about internal
power structures or egalitarian principles in wikiland, that how what we
do impacts on the reader, and more importantly the bio subject who is
the victim of our structural carelessness.
I guess that's what makes your concern for internal power structures and
my concern for egalitarian principles so different. It may have escaped
your attention that most of us who have stuck around for a long time do
support steadily improving quality, and can do so without becoming such
obsessives. No matter what we do there will always be a residue of
problematic articles. With the law of diminishing returns it is a
matter of determining when the cure becomes more harmful than the
problem being attacked.
Ec