Fred Bauder wrote:
We have a NPOV policy, not a majority rules policy.
Indeed, and I do agree that Jake's proposal is more than we actually need in order to start to deal with this.
However, I should point out that voting and NPOV are not _necessarily_ and _always_ at odds. We don't want to ever get into a situation where an article of total praise about George Bush is permanently fixed on wikipedia as long as it is getting 52% of the vote - obviously.
Wiki-editing works great in most cases to drive towards NPOV. The game theory of "mutually assured destruction" means that partisans have an incentive to try to "write for the enemy". What we are considering now is how to deal with a situation in which an *organized* group starts gaming our social rules (3RR in particular) to undermine the natural incentive structure of wiki editing.
--Jimbo