On 2/28/06, VeryVerily <veryverily(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't understand this. Why is an edit made in
March 2006 easier to
evaulate than one made in December 2004? And if my good intentions aren't
obvious to you after 1 1/2 years of intense editing, I don't see what magic
you expect in the coming months.
Context. I don't know the history as well as I know the history of
Why not? In both cases all you have is the presented edit histories
in front of you.
I happen to look at matters through my first hand appreciation of
them. It is clearly impossible to do this here.
live in the past.
But your job is to judge it.
No. My job is to decide what is in Wikipedia's best interests.
Yes. We are
giving you the chance to show that the restrictions *are*
(present tense, not past tense) unnecessary.
If the past is irrelevant, why I am I assumed guilty until proven
innocent? New users are not put through this meat grinder, so why me?
To be fair, you have been found "guilty", whether that was right or
wrong. We're looking at the future.
But I suppose it's naive of me to think you would
allow yourself to be
persuaded to change your vote.
You can persuade me by your actions.
If you want to change your vote, you'd better hurry. Not much time
for my actions.
I believe we said four months.