On 5/2/06, Joe Anderson
I accept that some may see it as uncivil, but I
for one do not.
In my opinion calling content contributed in good faith by our valued
contributors "cruft" is incivil. It sends the clear message that
their contributions, and by extension themselves, are valueless. Why
can't you just say "Not suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia due
to limited scope of interest"?
What if what Joe took "cruft" to mean what you just said? After all,
isn't that what it *does* mean? Why the stigmatism?