Erik Moeller wrote to Larry Sanger in part:
In general, I do not see the problems you see.
I agree with you here, Erik, and with others that have said the same thing. The problems with disruptive users (Helga, Lir, et al) aren't getting worse. (This is distinct from the problems with vandals.)
Note that one of your favorite "bad examples", Everything2, is an example for a community that has been completely eroded by a supposedly benevolent elite (albeit not a random, changing one).
I think that you're too dismissive of the value of random selection, however. This should be moot, since I agree with the more overarching point that it's better to have lots of administrators with devolved power than a select few, however selected. But when a select few is selected, then random selection breaks up concentrations of power -- assuming that the select few in question actually has the power.
Express respect for the other person's view, and try to find a way to integrate it without violating NPOV.
I agree with Larry that it's useless to express respect for people that are constitutionally incapable of acting respectably. (And I do believe that there are such people, in the short term.) However, I don't think that any of us is able to judge ahead of time which these people are. Ed Poor is famous for mentoring new users, whom he treats with respect and whose views he tries to integrate, and many of them have turned out to respond well to his efforts. A few, like Helga, did not -- but Ed would never have had his successes if he didn't treat *everybody* with respect. So in conclusion, I agree with you again, Erik.
-- Toby