[Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia moderators and moral authority (was Re: Repost: clear guidelines and the power to enforce)

Mon Nov 11 16:46:13 UTC 2002

On 11/11/02 11:24 AM, "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at 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. 