Quoting Philip Sandifer <snowspinner(a)gmail.com>om>:
It is certainly misguided. But had we not so utterly
soured our
relationship with the webcomics community (and we have - there is very
little rational discussion to be had with webcomics people about
Wikipedia anymore based on the slap in the face that the previous
campaign was) we could probably come to some sort of understanding
with a lot of them. Instead we made that impossible, because we're
awesome like that.
-Phil
But see my last post, where I noted all the major webcomics who are ok
with us.
We've really only pissed off a subset of the community and to some extent much
of that subset are people who would be pissed at us anyways. Pissing
off Howard
Tayler was bad, and we should try to do everything we can to get him
back on our
side if it is at all possible. But for a lot of the others they would
have been
pissed at us eventually. See for example at
http://www.partiallyclips.com/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=78b47d2cc544fd659e…
where Rob Balder responds to a polite attempt by Mindspillage to explain
notability and a few other issues.
Sure, pissing people off is bad but let's keep this in perspective.
Also, let's
remember that part of the entire webcomics problem was a backlash against an
inclusion criterion for any webcomic with even a very low Alexa rating. So
maybe one lesson from this should be "don't lower inclusion bars for any
subject, because when you raise them again you'll get lots of stress
and drama"