On 11/11/02 11:24 AM, "Poor, Edmund W" Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com wrote:
Can anyone view this as other than a 5-level hierarchy, with each level having more power than the levels below? Are not the higher levels an elite? Is this not an "imbalance of power"?
The question is not how to avoid creating an imbalance of power, but what to do with the current imbalance. If everyone is satisfied with the 5 levels we currently have (as is Cunctator, apparently), then we need do nothing. That is what Jimbo will most likely do: don't fix it, 'cause it ain't broken.
Huh? Why would I be satisfied? There's always some improvement to be made.
A "hierarchy" describes levels of authority, rather than functionality.
There are those who, shown a doctor, a plumber, and a fry cook, would say there's an obvious hierarchy there. But that's an unhealthy way to deal with people.
I've been saying that Mr. Poor could frame the issue in a better manner, not that there isn't an issue.
Mr. Poor has properly distinguished the functional categories. But to draw conclusions from those categories about how to manage Wikipedians is probably not the best thing. For example, a week ago I was in the same category as Mr. Poor and Maveric. I don't think we're equivalent Wikipedians. Now I'm in the same category as LDC and Brion Vibber. I don't think that makes us equivalent Wikipedians.