On 2007.11.16 01:53:04 +0000, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> scribbled 0 lines:
On 16/11/2007, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 16/11/2007, George Herbert
<george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:
We have no policy that says that we can't
have spoiler warnings. We have a
"last edit standing" consensus.
Those are by definition unstable and unenforcable.
Indeed. If people really wanted spoiler warnings, they'd be back.
No. People may want them but they don't want that level of conflict.
Victory through fear. Yes it's effective in the short term.
--
geni
I think his point here is a No True Scotsman point: 'If people *really* wanted spoiler
warnings, they'd be back' [emphasis added].
Sure, there may be real costs to trying to restore spoilers but hey - if you let
tedious-bot-reverts/edit-warring/warnings/blocks/bans deter you from adding and
maintaining spoiler warnings, then you obviously didn't *really* want spoilers. As
we've just established that no one actually cares about or wants spoilers, it
logically follows from WP:BOLD that it's perfectly alright to do anything in
furtherance of removing spoiler tags.
--
gwern