On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Elfur Logadottir wrote: > but why? isn't it a fact that you're on the admin list to 'admin' ? true > not all there are active, but that just means that they aren't active. > i would love to hear your argument for the difference of the two. plus > deliberation of your part as to whether there should be a difference or > not. (excuse some history here folks) vince h is a good example. till about 3 months ago, he was on the admin at lists.evolt.org list despite not having sent an email to that list or contributing in any way in over a year. by your definition, he is an administrator of evolt.org. by comparison, michele is not on the admin list yet continues to contribute time and effort to improving evolt and helping out with almost every project. again, using that definition, she isn't an administrator of evolt.org - an 'admin'. i would say she(and others) is more of an administrator of evolt.org thjan some who are on 'admin at lists.evolt.org'. just being on that list doesn't make you an administrator. thats like a pauper calling himself king simply because he wears the crown. the term 'admin'was coined because at the time, that group of people did everything administrative for evolt. this list, along with thesite list have taken the *majority* of those duties off that group. hence my use of the term 'editors' lately. > ok, but the trusted people need a venue to handle the administration. > basically, it seems to me that the only difference of an opinion between > you and me is the venue. i think that the venue for the trusted people > should be 'admin at lists.evolt.org' since that's where the configuration is > pointed anyway, where as i think you want it to be something else? > right? the trusted people shouldn't get to hide behind any closed lists/forums/whatever. this was my #1 problem with 'admin'. why do those people need a seperate venue? simply because there's always been one? .. and its a trivial issue to have it point somewhere other than admin at lists.evolt.org .djc.