Ok, so I think I'm understanding... basically, the proposal was to give people the same powers you've given me, Jani, Jonboy, and a few others, right?
Well, I've deleted spam comments and blogs before... If I accidentally (or purposely) deleted a kosher posting could you undo that?
I guess my concern boils down to this: Wikitravel is managed (in terms of spam and vandalism fighting, clean up, editing, and MoS perfecting) by a dedicated few. Then, occasionally, usually sometime after three months and hundreds or thousands of edits later someone gets the idea that a user understands the wiki process, Wikitravel policies, and consensus rules and someone says "User Y has been awesome. Y has edited over 30,000 articles, single handedly wrote 15,000 "star" articles and understands the principle of consensus and our policies. Let's give him a mop!"
There have been several nominations of administrators on Wikitravel that were outright denied because the community did not think the nominee was qualified or responsible enough to handle the "delete", "revert", "protect", and "block" buttons.
I think Extra should be similar. Ideally, someone would be familiar with WT policies and understand why Extra is extra and not Wikitravel. It should be known, beyond any doubt, that an Extra user would not abuse any additional powers.
Sapphire
Ok, so I think I'm
Ok, so I think I'm understanding... basically, the proposal was to give people the same powers you've given me, Jani, Jonboy, and a few others, right?
Well, I've deleted spam comments and blogs before... If I accidentally (or purposely) deleted a kosher posting could you undo that?
I guess my concern boils down to this: Wikitravel is managed (in terms of spam and vandalism fighting, clean up, editing, and MoS perfecting) by a dedicated few. Then, occasionally, usually sometime after three months and hundreds or thousands of edits later someone gets the idea that a user understands the wiki process, Wikitravel policies, and consensus rules and someone says "User Y has been awesome. Y has edited over 30,000 articles, single handedly wrote 15,000 "star" articles and understands the principle of consensus and our policies. Let's give him a mop!"
There have been several nominations of administrators on Wikitravel that were outright denied because the community did not think the nominee was qualified or responsible enough to handle the "delete", "revert", "protect", and "block" buttons.
I think Extra should be similar. Ideally, someone would be familiar with WT policies and understand why Extra is extra and not Wikitravel. It should be known, beyond any doubt, that an Extra user would not abuse any additional powers.