On 7/2/07, John Lee johnleemk@gmail.com wrote:
What I'm saying is, intentions are good, but by their fruits ye shall know them. The consistent implementation of this principle you, SlimVirgin and to a lesser extent Fred Bauder have been advocating has consistently resulted in abuses.
What consistency? One example, quickly contained. As I said, I've seen people doing sweeping removals of links to specific sites for all sorts of reasons, they don't need a strawman policy for justification.
Now, if this was the only way to achieve the result we all want - banning links made for the purpose of personal attacks or to otherwise harm an editor - then I'd be okay with it.
But as many of us have pointed out before, there's no reason a looser-worded policy or one based on the existing NPA policy would not achieve the same end.
What did you have in mind?
But when people have consistently exhibited a lack of the common sense required to apply this, and there is an alternative proposal which can achieve virtually the same results without relying on people having the common sense to know what is banned by this blanket and what is not, why should we not go for the alternative?
What consistent exhibitions of a "lack of common sense" have you seen?