On 7/28/06, Erik Moeller eloquence@gmail.com wrote:
It wasn't sustainable, of course, but I think it reflects a very different wiki philosophy than the notion that an article has be perfectly balanced at any given point in time. I think the basic philosophy is valid, [[iff]] the reader is informed about a lack of balance through the appropriate tags. Of course, the description above suggests adding unsourced innuendo, which we have rightly become much more wary of in recent times.
Yeah, it's startling to read, the days when Wikipedia's main goal was expanding itself. Now our goal seems to be keeping the freaks in check.
Steve