geni wrote:
On 11/14/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
wrote:
> That's absolutely and incredibly not true.
They write a verifiable
> article about something they know, get abusive comments on AFD (for
> some reason, civility and assume good faith don't work there ... the
> reason AFD is so damn poisonous to the community is that it blatantly
> encourages participants to assume *bad* faith) and *leave*.
That would be unusal. More likely they will simply be
ignored. Most
stuff that lands on afd is not implicetly verifiable.
Case where this happened really badly: webcomics. We now have a
project fork, Comixpedia, entirely caused by AFD. You may recall
extensive discussion surrounding this on this list a few weeks ago.
- d.