[Wikipedia-l] Re: Policy

[Vicki Rosenzweig]

At 02:21 AM 10/1/02 -0400, you wrote:
>On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 01:48, Daniel Mayer wrote:
>
> > But they are /not/ encyclopedia articles, or even talk pages for that 
> matter.
> > Therefore normal rules of editing do not really apply.
> >
> > At the very least there needs to be boilerplate on those pages mentioning
> > that they are policy/guidelines/conventions/style guides/rules to consider
> > etc. and also have statements indicating how each page type should be 
> edited;
> > policy of course can't be changed by fiat; neither can conventions 
> (although
> > there should be a bit more wiggle-room here), style guides are somewhat 
> open
> > to unilateral change (although you should expect protests and reverts) 
> and of
> > course rules to consider can be edited fairly liberally.
> >
>These ideas represent exactly the kind of stultification and
>bureaucratization I fear.
>
>To be less vaguely disapproving, I'll say that the fewer rules there
>are, the better. And the fewer rules about the rules, even better.
>
>It is *crucial* to recognize that by comparison to the number of
>Wikipedians in the future, the collective number of participants on this
>mailing list is effectively equivalent to a single person. So policies
>that are hashed out on the mailing list right now are little better than
>ones done "unilaterally" or "by fiat".

No. It's open to anyone who wants to be here, and if people use
informative subject lines, someone can choose to read only the
policy-related messages.

Can you really not see the difference between something one person
does, and something a few dozen discuss?
-- 
Vicki Rosenzweig
vr at redbird.org
http://www.redbird.org