On 2/4/06, The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com>
It's not a taste issue -- it's a culture
issue. I strongly believe
that inclinations to building an outsider-insider dichotomy, a culture
that worries about destruction and damage, that is paranoid about
attack and ruination, is one that is pernicious to the Wikipedia
So in the end, that's the objection. The name bugs you. Nothing to do
with how they actually work, what they have or have not done, but the
name. And an assumption about the culture of the people who
participate in it, and generally in insider-outsider metaphors.
Don't get me wrong -- I know metaphors are important. I've read my
"Metaphor and War", my _Metaphors We Live By_, my _Women, Fire, and
Dangerous Things_, and I think they're all great, smart works. But
unless you can present some real EVIDENCE of a pernicious problem
stemming from the name of this group of editors, I find it very hard
to be persuaded that this is a serious issue.
How about being persuaded that the name should be changed and that
editors shouldn't be declaring war on vandals?