-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
But that's exactly my point. _What the policy says_ is (ie 'if this happens, in this way, then this is the consequence') _all_ that achieved consensus (and therefore all the is enforceable) - anything above and beyond that is not endorsed by the community (or, in the case of decrees, not endorsed by Jimbo unless he subsequently says so) and therefore is not policy. Taking your example, if there was community consensus to extending the 3RR to 25 hours then it would be amended as such.
Cynical
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
David Alexander Russell wrote:
<snip> > I'm not seeking a reconsideration of the userbox 'issue' here (thank > God/[insert alternative deity of your choice here] that's over), but > it shows just how easy it is to ignore policy if you characterise > those seeking to uphold policy as trolls, wikilawyers and process > wonks. >
There's a difference between process wonks and policy wonks:
- Process wonks favour process over policy
- Policy wonks favour policy over process
A process wonk will often get the wrong result using the right method. A policy wonk will get the right result using the wrong method. Remember, it's not the letter of the rules which counts, it's the spirit of the rules; hence, making 4 reverts in 25 hours counts as breaking 3RR.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l