To be fair...

[hypnoticvibe]

As much as I disagree with the policy towards webmasters and am bottled up with frustration, talking to the members (which I never really did before) has shown stereotypes to be wrong so far. Not 1 person demonstrated an "inflated ego" or "abuse of power" as rumors claim. Criticism was taken well and nobody attacked me for challenging them.

[makrhod]

Well, maybe at least one message did get through then. That would be very reassuring. Thank you.

[crowbar]

We're just ordinary people, like anyone else, hypnoticvibe. I don't think any of us are on any kind of power trip, .

 

Even within our own editing community, what we do is refered to as " having editing permissions", and not ownerships or rights. We don't even like to refer to categories we edit in as "my cat", because that infers some kind of ownership, but rather "the cat/cats I have permission to edit in".

 

The reason for that is because editing isn't a right, but a priveledge that we are being trusted with. When an editor breaks that trust, it's a slap in the face to all of us.

 

Even our meta editors, who have the widest experience and permissions, are not haughty, arrogant, or abusive to even the least of us, but, more like senior advisors to the editing community, and they weren't just handed that position, they earned it, .

 

Any one of us could become one of these senior editors, if we're willing to put in the kind of time, work, and dedication that it takes to become one.

 

I, personally, have no desire to have those kinds of responsibilities, I'm perfectly happy just being one of the Indians, .