On 11/21/05, David Gerard <fun(a)thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
You've already *asserted* your bad faith outright,
when you proudly
declared you were systematically removing content from articles.
Systematically? Prove it (and with permission images don't count). You
can't my edits are rarely if ever systematic. We refure to
wikipedians as editors not authors. Editing does from time mean
removeing material. Material can lose its function within an article
if previously it's only function is to pad the article out.
It's a bit odd you now claim you're entitled
to a fresh assumption
of good faith.
- d.
Yes and no. If we follow the logic that if a person committs one act
of bad faith from then on AGF does not apply to them we run into the
problem of practicaly formaliseing grudge matches. While this wouldn't
really worry me on a personal level I don't think it would produce the
kind of community atmosphere people are aiming for. Of course I could
be wrong since I'm not aware of any real research into this area.
--
geni