On 4/15/07, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
I'm not sure I'm following the logic here. A handful of people are stuck doing the majority of the work in some area, and they're of necessity familiar with the abstruse (albeit efficient) mechanism for doing it. But since they're the only people doing the work, there's no point devising a more hand-holding mechanism which would let more people participate (but which the "experts" would presumably have no use for)? Isn't this just a little bit circular?
No because the "more people participating" will have such a low work rate is is not worth the loss of efficiency it would cause the admins doing most of the work.