It's something of a balancing act. by
VixenMage
on 2012-09-10 01:35:00 UTC
Reply
This has come up before - usually right when the balance between People Waiting For Permission and People Tired of Answering All The Requests hits critical mass (though fortunately, not this time, I think). It's not a bad idea to call roll and figure out where we are before we reach Torch-and-Pitchfork status, and props to hS for doing so.
The main two reasons I am a fan of more PGs rather than fewer are fairly simple. First, selfishly, less stress on the PGs- shared burdens are halved and so on, and it just means less of a workload per person in general. Second, on an entirely different front, diffusion of power. Yes, I'm paranoid. But the more different, trustworthy people we have filling the position, the less likely we are to ever wind up with a monolith.
--VM, who tried to post this three times from various devices last night. Bah, and humbug.
I honestly don't know. by
Huinesoron
on 2012-09-09 07:23:00 UTC
Reply
The problem is, a fair number of us aren't all that active (including, most of the time, me), and there is, among those laughingly called 'humanity', a common tendency to say 'Oh, someone else will deal with it'. If (say) Dann and Cassie are busy that week, I decide to let someone else take a Request, and VM and Araeph decide it's too close to call... but that same list could happen if we had twenty.
Personally I think we should be able to run with five (or more if more show up!); the test of that will be whether we respond to Permission posts effectively. Mostly, though, I was just feeling twitchy.
hS