On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:59:41 -0400, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com wrote:
We were inundated with spam. We still are. G11 is a necessary tool, and in any case we could creatively delete blatant spam as vandalism anyway. The vast majority of G11 tagged articles *are* abominations, unlike G11. Spend time looking at CAT:CSD some time.
With all due respect, that's certainly the company line. I spend plenty of time w/CAT:CSD - we're not inundated in a way that required such a breathless, panicky, rushed situation like we ended up with.
Rushed? People had been asking for G11 for as long as I can remember. It was going to happen sooner or later anyway, and a firm steer from Foundation that spam, abuse of Wikipedia resources for self-promotion, is an abuse and should be stamped on, is hardly a controversial idea.
Of course, we're deathly afraid of anything that might actually benefit someone outside of the project, to boot, so I guess I shouldn't be that surprised by the general Office/Foundation reaction. I just chalk it up to another one of those bizarre deals.
You have a strange view of things. The entire project is for the benefit of people outside the foundation, mainly people like you and me and my kids.
Guy (JzG)