|
The days of strong leaders who "manage" groups or people are long over, these days leaders can't really force others to do anything they wouldn't normally do, and tend to be more of a figurehead or a 'face' for the group. They're the people who end up doing the stuff that no one else really wants to do, but don't have any real power. If they try to force someone into doing something, they either end up with a dysfunctional group or all alone.
In that way, I don't believe any one person actually chooses, or actually becomes either; though pleanty still fool themselves into thinking so. In the first generation leaders would dictate "we're doing this series" and translators, everyone else would follow suit. Likewise, do a series the leader didn't approve of and it would never hit distro, even if it was otherwise release-able. These days, it's pretty much the other way around, projects begin with a translator who is willing to work on it, other staff pretty much falls into place if the series has any viability / promise, and groups are "led" by de-facto mob rule, if at all.
It's just like irl where the whole 'middle management' thing is disappearing and companies want managers who can work (and, to some extent, workers who can manage). The line between the two isn't as clear as it used to be.
|