On 10/7/07, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On 10/7/07, Adrian aldebaer@googlemail.com wrote:
Anthony schrieb:
On 10/7/07, Adrian aldebaer@googlemail.com wrote:
With that rationale, why would we need a process where the community expresses trust with the tools in the first place?
Well, it makes sockpuppetry harder. Other than that, it really isn't needed.
Are there more people who share that opinion? I always thought RfA mattered *somehow*.
Don't know, I'm only speaking for myself.
So you're basically saying: The community is good enough to be called upon to express their trust initially, but they can never express a change of heart regarding that trust? Sounds weird.
It's not a concept without precedent. Lots of US judicial positions work that way, for instance.
The status quo in US politics may not be the *gold standard* we'd want to model Wikipedia after.
I think the US judicial system has held up pretty well. Taking pot shots at anything related to the US is unhelpful.
Well, he said the status quo in US politics, it's not exactly a pot shot at the US judicial system. Some places the political system and the judicial system are one and the same. In the US where judges can be appointed forever the political system does play into it. And, I personally allow potshots at the US political system by any and all.
KP