Actually I think that some of those we might imagine to be bad would, if they were elected, get down to work and a lot of imagined trouble might not happen at all.
Fred
On Jul 11, 2005, at 9:38 PM, Rebecca wrote:
On 7/12/05, Phil Sandifer sandifer@sbcglobal.net wrote:
In a lot of cases, I don't know that there is anything. I mean, my understanding is that Ambi would like to stop being charged by the meg for Internet access...
-Snowspinner
Well, that's part of it. The key thing though is that I and others are just burnt out - it's vastly more fun to be writing articles than continually having to deal with the worst of Wikipedia day after day. I think it's always going to be something that has a high turnover rate, and that this isn't necessarily a bad thing - as long as we keep replacing people when they've had enough, the current system, with twelve arbitrators, works fine. There's just not always enough decent people to replace a huge amount of spots - I can't help but think that if another six or eight new arbitrators had been appointed in December that there would have been the shitfight from hell all through this year, as some very controversial people could've gotten up.
-- ambi _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l