On 10/27/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That's a matter of wording. GM proposed this
using the language of
statement (an effective technique to get things done). Ultimately, if
enough are/were opposed to the proposal, it wouldn't be carried out.
Sometimes wording is important. Wikipedia always requires positive
consensus, not negative. If we can't agree on something, we stick with
the status quo. GM's email is worded as if he intends this to work the
other way around, and he has no authority to decide that.
GM is undoing something that there was no initial positive consensus for.
The precedent (see the original nofollow controversy) is that when a
decision does not have positive consensus behind it, there needs not be a
positive consensus to undo it.
Johnleemk