On May 26, 2008, at 12:54 AM, Todd Allen wrote:
There is certainly a balance to be struck. On the one hand, we certainly don't want to tie everyone up in red tape, and unfortunately sometimes that does seem to happen. On the other, we certainly -do- want to stop POV pushers, copyright violators, non-notable vanity pushers, and spammers, and sometimes that doesn't seem to happen.
I don't think it's a question of more policy or less policy. I think it's a question of -better- policy, mostly, and determining what is most effective at its intended purpose with the least unintended consequences. Nothing is ever going to be 100%, but we can certainly do better. I think we'd do better to make gradual changes to policy and evaluate how they work, rather than the sudden, radical shifts we can see now.
I don't think that this is a problem that is solved via policy. Policy is a relatively ineffectual medium. It does very little on its own. Policy doesn't drive off POV pushers - communities of editors - often very localized ones - do. Policy ostensibly guides them in how they do this, but as often as not it doesn't - just like most articles aren't actually written by consulting WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV, but are written by a community of editors with a decent idea of what a good article should look like.
Our policies are almost, but not entirely incidental to the actual work of improving the encyclopedia - they're certainly a second line of defense, consulted when the first line of defense - social control - fails.
In other words, what we need is not better policy, but rather better users who rely on thought and judgment that is informed by principles, not on rigid policy.
-Phil