Daniel Mayer wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
>For those worried that "firefighter"
tends to imply
>that a wave of newbies is a problem (a raging fire),
>just remember that it was originally the Wikipedia "militia".
The fires created are not the newbies themselves,
but the damage a small part
of them do (either intentional or not).
So we don't think of them as fires but rather as potential arsonists?
I don't mean to say that the term /is/ inherently insulting,
but any term that suggests that newbies may cause trouble (and they may)
will be capable of being taken the wrong way.
(I personally find "firefighter" acceptable.)