Ray Saintonge wrote:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Why should 2 people be able to overthrow a bunch of others in case where there's nothing wrong with their judgement? You'd need a bloody good reasons for an undeletion. If you have evidence they were misinformed, undelete. If you know they didn't provide a valid rationale, undelete. If they provided a now outdated rationale, undelete. But undeletions as well as deletions should be proofed and checked by the community before they happen.
"Overthrow" seems like a drastic term in these circumstances. Why should a desire to undelete something be seen as an attack on their judgement? Things have gone too far when the deleters take a simple request to undelete as a serious criticism of their personal judgement. It's as though they are insisting that they are never wrong.
It's the Assumption of Bad Faith. MGM, can you see that it looks like a gross Assumption of Bad Faith?
What makes you say only two people are needed?
Because I don't think that one would be enough, particularly if that one is not an admin. Having a second person agree gives a little room for a reality check.
I hereby declare that I will make deleted content (apart from copyvios etc) available for reading. Of course, using it to recreate the deleted content is speedyable, and using it to keep it hanging around in your userspace may get you penalised as Anthony was for doing so. But that's what you do with it afterwards.
- d.