On Sunday 02 June 2002 12:01 pm, Ruth wrote:
Another issue is whether we want to identify
members' functions, at all, on the user page. There are
many other ways to identify developers and sysops on
Wikipedia and they should be considered too. There could
be a sysops page and a developers page with a list of
such people.
Frankly, I like the site as it is. Developers are
identified by going to Source Forge, usually, and if a
developer has not been included on this site, I think
they can simply ask. Sysops know who they are by the
sidebar on their view of the Wikipedia pages.
I agree with Ruth here and don't think it is necessary to label anyones
"status" as a matter of policy. If a sysop or developer wants his or her
status known, then they will say so on their user page.
Contributors are already able to get a good idea who is a sysop, developer or
whatever by either digging a little, paying attention to RecentChanges for a
few weeks or by asking.
I kinda like the fact that potential vandals don't know who is a sysop and
who isn't or even if a sysop is online at a particular moment.
Anybody of good intentions can be a sysop if they want to be. I don't think
we should label people as having a particular status and thus imply that this
status is anything particularly special. Having different user's labeled as
having particular status would only enforce a sense that a cabal exists here
-- which it doesn't. It might also lead to confusion when there are valid
disagreements about an article between a non-sysop party and a sysop. The
non-sysop would be able to see that a particular person is a sysop and this
knowledge might imply that the sysop is acting in some type of official
capacity -- which they seldom are in these cases.
I for one don't want that weight constantly on my shoulders.
But, that's just me.
--maveric149