Forum:Philosophical Question?

So, the founder of a wikia is the person who originaly requested the wikia using the request form. And the sysops promoted there are administrators (According to the fact the MediaWiki pages have a distinct link between Administrator and sysop). Then we have adopt a wikia, the person who adopts the wikia basicly takes on the role of the long inactive founder who has abandoned the wika. But someone who adopts the wikia never used the request form. So the philosophical question is: What do we call someone who adopts a wikia, Do we call them the new Founder, or do we give them a lesser title even when they half to clean up any mess that could be left behind by the old one (Some founders do leave because of a daunting task or a mess to far out of control)?

Just something to think about, Kinda would be nice to know what to refer to one who has adopted a wikia. dantman 05:40, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I've always referred to them as the new founder, after all.. adoption only happens on an inactive wiki, so they need to found the community from scratch, even if there is some content. In an active community there is no need for a new founder (although the might need a new bureaucrat if the founder was the only one.  But "new founder" works for me. -- sannse (talk) 06:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Lol, ya sounds like a good definition. Heh, Bureaucrats... I'm still wating for that status... they must be waiting a fair ammount of time for the old founder to respond. She probably won't. dantman 00:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Which wiki are you on? and do you need bureacrat status yet? If the old founder isn't responding, then we can change your rights when needed -- sannse (talk) 08:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)