On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
There is only one way to prove any of that, though, and that's giving it a go. If we only make the flagged rev the default version for articles that are currently (semi-)protected keeping up with the sighting would be easy - that's the version of the proposal that should be completely uncontroversial.
You would think— But thats only true if the resistance is driven by a risk analysis, it's not true for resistance driven by either a hard philosophical objection (The "unwiki" position taken by many in the discussions) or due to an attempt to thwart change in general. In either of these cases you could demonstrate that it works great and those opinions would not change. Moreover, the possibility that a test may be successful and dispel fears is a reason to oppose testing for opponents whom care about things other than success.
But flagged revisions for currently protected pages is more wiki than protected pages...