Listing maintainers on info pages.
Short, concise description of the idea
A recent change is automatically listing community maintainers on community info pages. Let's not.
Full description of the idea
If a person wants to be known for maintaining a community, they can already immediately list themselves on the info page if they wish. Possible reasons for making such a listing automatic don't seem to outweigh the flexibility of leaving it up to the community maintainers/owners.
As a back-up maintainer of a very lightly moderated (almost never moderated) community, I'd rather my name didn't automatically appear.
As the originator of another community, running into problems with "authority structure", I also appointed 16 or so people as maintainers and quit as maintainer myself. These people were meant to remain annonymous if it was their decision, and it was almost unanimously their decision to remain anonymous. The arrangement, spreading authority and so diluting it, has worked well, and probably would continue to work well if the maintainers weren't all outed against their wills. This is just one illustrative case.
All maintainers who would rather not have their name on the info page and so be immediately singled out have had their anonymity removed without notice or choice.
- Controversial communities may now have their maintainers singled out against their wishes, especially since they may be operating under the assumption they are still anonymous. There needs to be options for not having this list, or just do away with it...see next point.
- Maintainers and owners can already choose to put their name on the info page if they wish.
- Listing maintainers automatically decreases flexibility in authority structuring.
- Retroactive automatic listing removes previously granted anonymity. Such listing should be opt-in only, if it is to continue to exist, NOT opt-out.
An ordered list of problems/issues involved
- New or inept maintainers may not realize they should put their name in the info (or opt-in to show maintainers if wished). This could cause momentary confusions.
- Maintainers may hide behind anonymity to mess with members. Though members could then just leave. Maybe this is why this feature was added. I don't see it outweighing some of the problems.
An organized list, or a few short paragraphs detailing suggestions for implementation
- Claw-back the feature.
- Or keep the feature, but have it optional, and opt-in only, not opt-out, at least in previously established accounts so that presumed anonymity is preserved in cases where having maintainers singled out may be undesirable (dangerous?).