On 3/12/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/12/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
Forgot to add the connection between the above points and the "some articles having different policies" -- it's because appealing to the Foundation is not official policy, but is an unwritten and semi-secret method for getting changes to happen, only those who know about that avenue (or figure it out) get to use it -- creating the effective policy difference.
Yep, only those who know the secret back passage can get the number of grandchildren in their article changed to its correct date. It seems to me from what I've read that most of the changes that get made in these cases are made as normal edits by Danny or someone. Only a very small number of articles get the "office" treatment, and those are publicly signposted.
No one has yet pointed out a case where this avenue has been abused, either. That is, where an NPOV article become SymPOV due to threats by lawyers etc.
So you're probably taking it a little too seriously.
If you follow this thread, I'm trying to understand why Jimbo called Delirium's understanding of the situation "false". Do you agree with Jimbo?