On 6/5/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
The other fallacy to be avaided is saying that all
policy decisions are
final. We have shown ourselves ill-equipped to deal with subtle changes
in circumstances when people insist on the strict leteral application of
rules. Rather then defending hard-wired rules we need to be sensitive
to changes, and the need to consider the opinions of those who did not
participate in the formation of the rules for whatever reason. These
reasons include not having been a part of the Wikipedia community at the
time the rule was adopted. We need to recognize that the young people
who will be most affected by rules did not have a vote in the way that
the older generations chose to fuck it up.
Problem is the wording of the rules was precisely based on the fear
that people would try to do what they are now trying to do. BLP only
allows deletion of unsourced info precisely because people were
worried about what is now happening.
CSD is so limiting because people didn't want admins to decide stuff
more than was required to keep the wiki ticking over.
What makes it harder for policy decisions is the
unwillingness of some
to consider alternative solutions. MPs don't exactly inspire confidence
in the real world; what makes you think that wikiMPs would do any
better?
Judging by experience with trying to elect an arbcom they would be a lot worse.
--
geni