Difference between revisions of "User:Ed Poor"
m (→Explanations: senior staff have been amazingly tolerant of opposing ideas here) |
(→Who do you think you are?: arrogant) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Q: Is this your personal blog, or what?! | Q: Is this your personal blog, or what?! | ||
| − | A: No, but it just so happens that nearly every word I type, link I create, article or template I start - gains instant and widespread acceptance. | + | A: No, but it just so happens that nearly every word I type, link I create, article or template I start - gains instant and widespread acceptance. |
| + | |||
| + | Q: Isn't that a bit arrogant? | ||
| + | |||
| + | A: Okay, I guess you're right. Perhaps I should be more humble. | ||
==Explanations== | ==Explanations== | ||
Revision as of 02:24, April 10, 2007
Who do you think you are?
Q: Is this your personal blog, or what?!
A: No, but it just so happens that nearly every word I type, link I create, article or template I start - gains instant and widespread acceptance.
Q: Isn't that a bit arrogant?
A: Okay, I guess you're right. Perhaps I should be more humble.
Explanations
There was a time when Wikipedia was a meritocracy, and I rose rapidly through the ranks then. I got Jimbo to create the Mediation and Arbitration committee's, so he wouldn't have to be the sheriff all the time. I became the first elected bureaucrat, and pioneered the system whereby admins could enforce rules without having to take everything before a committee.
But I didn't see the anti-elitism creeping up and choking the life out of the place. Larry Sanger was right.
My only worry about Conservapedia is that it might make the equal and opposite mistake; it has certainly been accused of it, hundreds of times. But senior staff have been amazingly tolerant of opposing ideas here so far and I reason to hope they will continue to do so.