On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 13:58, WereSpielChequers
<werespielchequers(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hmm nice that he's not entirely relying on the
Siegenthaler incident and has
quoted something beyond 2007. But his reliance on a 2009 Daily Mail story
about 20,000 editors vetting changes via flagged revisions
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208941/Free-edit-Wikipedia-appoint…
Yes, during the pending changes trial, Reviewer status was basically
being given out along with Rollback. The idea that there was some kind
of political motivation behind it is insane. Yes, more experienced
users with things like Rollback or Reviewer rights tend to run the
site, but that might be because those people are selected for their
ability to competently manage the site and those who are incompetent,
don't. That may be wishful thinking.
--
Tom Morris
<http://tommorris.org/>