On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:50 PM, stevertigo <stvrtg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You might be misunderstanding what the objection
is here. Nobody needs to
be
reminded that use of sysop tools is subject to
peer review.
True (though I don't think David is misunderstanding anything). The
issue is not reviewing how sysops use their tools. It is about
correcting the misconceptions upon which sysops base a substantially
destructive usage of those tools.
I think that's a noble goal, and the idea behind this project seems like a
good one. Incidentally, I'm probably in the running for most rabid
inclusionist here. I think we all ought to be able to understand, though,
that it goes too far when the experiment itself becomes a source of
disruption. I don't know all the details, but I'm guessing that's why WSC
asked to put it on hold.
-- causa sui