On 23/12/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
On 12/19/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
I haven't participated in any of the discussion about Assume Good Faith, but in my experience, I've usually encountered it when users quote it to claim that criticism of them is equivalent to not assuming good faith. Does it really solve more problems than it causes?
It's like "don't be a dick". The idea is to do it, not to quote it.
I personally agree with Jimbo's elevation of "assume good faith" to be the single mantra which binds us together and makes Wikipedia work. Everyone *does* need to know about. You don't enforce it, you don't beat people over the head with it, but you do make sure people are aware of its existence, and hope they follow it.
That's better. More than either a rule or a guideline, "assume good faith" is a principle. It is integral to the five pillars.
Ec
Apparently this pillar is unenforceable and does more harm than good... (Not my thoughts)
Peter