On 28/02/07, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> especially over deletionism vs inclusionism, but
I can't think of any
> (except trolls, of course) who assumed the other party was acting in bad
> faith. That's the kind of respect I'm talking about.
Look at the reactions to schoolwatch.
Look at what invoked it. They formed into an organised group as the
only way to deal with evidently contemptuous mass-nominations of
school articles.
When AFD formed factions in this manner, it was evidently a deeply
broken process. Two years later, it's an even more deeply broken
process. There's gotta be a better way. More than that, there's gotta
be some resolution of the deeper assumptions.
It will not fix itself, because a group is its own worst enemy and
will not change from within. It will resist change from the outside,
on the assumption that they're so busy and vital that any outside
interference must be assumed negative until absolutely proven
otherwise. (A good example is how AFD resisted changing the page from
one single multiple-megabyte slab of HTML until the devs said it was
actually causing noticeable performance problems all on its own.)
Shut AFD for a month. The article load will be negligible compared to
the daily firehose of crap, and we can do without the poisonousness
inside and outside the project.
- d.