Jeff Heikkinen wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
I think the word you're looking for is "irony". Alphax was making the ironic observation that an overwhelming number of Wikipedians are more concerned with consensus than with quality.
Not only that but they misunderstand the nature of consensus. Effective consensus depends on having effective community. Consensus that is motivated by being right and winning your point is not much of a consensus.
I'm not sure what you mean by "winning your point", but why is being right NOT a good motivation? I'm having a hard time thinking of a better one.
Yeah! Maybe I should stop accidentally watching Dr. Phil on TV. Damn radical Texans! Just before I wrote the above he was talking about "rights warriors" in a marriage. Some of them can end up "right" in Divorce Court.
Being right is wrong when the wrong person also thinks he's as right. Who has the monopoly on objectivity?
Ec