On 6/5/07, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
There is *one* passing comment, made in response to my complaint, about a neutral article being a defensibly a "good thing", because then we get on top of the google results and it's better than the alternatives - I disagree with it, but it's a reasoned position. Otherwise... not a smidgen of editorial thought. Just an incantation of an article of faith, a slavish devotion to a meaningless line in the sand.
Your contention appears to be that every policy should be up for rediscussion and renegotiation on every single AfD? Wouldn't it be better to leave AfD for *application* of policy, and have the philosophising at some central location? I'm not saying your arguments aren't valid, but to accuse people of "slavishly" applying policy at a place designed for the application of policy is unfair. That's what they're supposed to be doing there.
Are we really saying that *because we made up an arbitrary rule ourselves*, we get to ignore any form of editorial sense and then loudly disclaim responsibility for the result? Do people honestly
Kind of. Fix the policy.
Steve