[WikiEN-l] Major dysfunction in RfA Culture

[Steve Summit]

geni wrote:
> 3)there is no benefit in designing processes to be comprehensible to
> those who don't use them regularly. If you have 20 people doing 90% of
> the work in one area (say a sub aspect of deletion) there is little
> point in worrying about the needs of that 10% when setting up the
> process. This is why process may appear incomprehensible to outsiders.
> No benefit in doing otherwise.

I'm not sure I'm following the logic here.  A handful of people
are stuck doing the majority of the work in some area, and they're
of necessity familiar with the abstruse (albeit efficient)
mechanism for doing it.  But since they're the only people doing
the work, there's no point devising a more hand-holding mechanism
which would let more people participate (but which the "experts"
would presumably have no use for)?  Isn't this just a little bit
circular?