On 12/10/05, Mark Gallagher m.g.gallagher@student.canberra.edu.au wrote:
G'day Keith,
Alternatively, we shouldn't shut down a system that works reasonably well and performs an important task without having something that works better.
Ay, there's the rub. I get the feeling those arguing for shutting down AfD don't feel that it *does* perform an important task. Rather, they'd prefer not to have deletions at all (other than CSDs, which already apparently go too far ...).
Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!"
- Danger Mouse
I think Mark has an excellent point here. Some of the people supporting AFD being turned off seem to think that. Others just want to get rid of any poisonous feelings.
I think deletion policy should provide to deleting or shutting off AFD itself. Don't delete an article if it is a vandal target yet a valid article topic. If it can be improved, do so and don't delete it. We'd be deleting stuff like "George W. Bush" and "GNAA" on a regular basis for the wrong reasons.
If something is wrong with AFD, then those exact problems need to be found and addressed. Shutting off AFD is a cop out.