Timwi timwi@gmx.net wrote:
Cheney Shill wrote:
--- Kelly Martin kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com wrote:
I've already explained this elsewhere, so I'll only
give a quick
summary here. Wikipedia does something _right_ by
letting everyone
edit. The underlying philosophy is that everyone
starts out as
innocent
This is equivalent to saying existing users have
superior knowledge to new users.
I'm sorry, I don't understand how.
Look up the word innocent. If Kelly's underlying philosphy is that you're a child and she's an adult, where does that leave you on the knowledge tree?
You're claiming that the same thing you claim is wrong
about the
admin approval, to be suspicious of the admins intent,
reliability,
and knowledge, is actually being applied, at the very
least, to every
new user.
Well yes... who else do you think it is applied to? Clearly not the admins :-p
Ahhh, to be an admin with a free ride to edit with a complete disregard for policy.
It seems the ruling policy, NPOV, is inherently
suspicious
and it's not really a problem to be suspicious from the ground up.
I honestly don't see what NPOV has to do with anything in this thread.
If the underlying policy of Wikipedia is suspicious, then what's the problem with applying suspicion to deciding who becomes an admin? You'll have to read Kelly's post for this to make sense. If it still doesn't, ask Kelly to explain what her post has to do with this thread.
~~Pro-Lick http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Halliburton_Shill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick http://www.wikiality.com/User:Pro-Lick (now a Wikia supported site)
--spam may follow--
____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com