WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 3/6/2008 9:31:31 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com writes:
If you have enough of admins learning from high-profile admins, then there is a bias for shifting the whole terms of engagement thing to, for example, a theory that "admins should stamp on any disruption". Not so. >>
Well I'm currently arguing on the Talk of the Main Page that making the Main Page full protect creates a two-tiered level of editor. We create a situation where admins gain *permanent* editing priviledges on a particular sub-set of article space.
I don't think the community ever agreed to that sort of dichotomy. Protect was, to my mind, always supposed to be used in a temporary setting, to temporarily address content or vandalism issues.
Will Johnson
**************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I don't mean to derail the thread, but the main page I believe is an unfortunate exception to the spirit of protection. I'll have a look over the talk apge, if I have something new to bring to the table there, I will.
./scream