On Sunday 02 June 2002 12:01 pm, Ruth wrote:

Another issue is whether we want to identify members' functions, at all, on the user page. There are many other ways to identify developers and sysops on Wikipedia and they should be considered too. There could be a sysops page and a developers page with a list of such people.      Frankly, I like the site as it is. Developers are identified by going to Source Forge, usually, and if a developer has not been included on this site, I think they can simply ask. Sysops know who they are by the sidebar on their view of the Wikipedia pages.

I agree with Ruth here and don't think it is necessary to label anyones "status" as a matter of policy. If a sysop or developer wants his or her status known, then they will say so on their user page.

Contributors are already able to get a good idea who is a sysop, developer or whatever by either digging a little, paying attention to RecentChanges for a few weeks or by asking.

I kinda like the fact that potential vandals don't know who is a sysop and who isn't or even if a sysop is online at a particular moment.

Anybody of good intentions can be a sysop if they want to be. I don't think we should label people as having a particular status and thus imply that this status is anything particularly special. Having different user's labeled as having particular status would only enforce a sense that a cabal exists here -- which it doesn't. It might also lead to confusion when there are valid disagreements about an article between a non-sysop party and a sysop. The non-sysop would be able to see that a particular person is a sysop and this knowledge might imply that the sysop is acting in some type of official capacity -- which they seldom are in these cases.

I for one don't want that weight constantly on my shoulders.

But, that's just me.

--maveric149