On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 10:56:10 -0800, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Maybe we did, back when we had fewer than two million articles and fewer than a million users, and were not a top-ten site making us an essential part of any vanity, spam or POV-pushing campaign.
Why should our behaviour as a top-ten site change from the behaviour that got us there? The faults that you list did not suddenly spring-up when we became a top-ten site. They have all scaled up very well, but that was always predictable.
I wonder if Judd Bagley would have gone to such lengths two years ago?
Guy (JzG)