It's just strange why the "FAC regulars" would rather expend enormous bandwidth attacking TCO and then attacking a SignPost editor Skomorokh who said to Moni3 that her comment to the SignPost was Out of line:
QUOTE
Skomorokh says to Mon3 of her attack on him and on the SignPost opinion page:
QUOTE
As SandyGeorgia told the DYK people:
QUOTE
After all, FA editors list their achievements on their user pages and the editors are ranked by number of FAs at
WP:BFAN. FA editors get their articles displayed in a big chunk on the main page (however obscure the article). They have a method of determining what is a FA, a cumbersome process that allows only "FA editors" special privileges (they can nominate more that one article at a time, their comments are given more weight). This gives "FA editor" a leg up in racking up more FAs.
So why are they "hurt" by being named in TCOs analysis, when they advertise their FAs at every turn, rate themselves by number of FAs, and mention "their" articles at every chance? Is there no accountability for all the main page exposure they receive?
The FA director was appointed many years ago, apparently for life. He exercises no leadership but is given deference. One of the three "FA delegates" SandyGeorgia, has more "power" than the other two and is given deference by all "FA editors". After all, when you are busy pushing your own FAs, you can hardly afford to alienate her. That would be suicide.
Why aren't the positions at FA decided openly, by elections for example, as TCO suggests? Why are SandyGeorgia and Moni3 posting personal attacks and derogatory statements about TCO thither and yon but refusing to give a reasoned opinion to the SignPost?
Why are the FA people not accountable to anyone else? Why is nothing out in the open? Does SandyGeorgia's attack the SignPost because it won't do her bidding? She can't bully them as she does everyone else?
This post has been edited by chrisoff: