On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 June 2010 19:15, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
The objective of this trial isn't to give us good press, it's to persuade the community that this is a useful and viable tool.
I couldn't disagree more. The objective of this trial is to see if the feature is effective. This is a trial, not a marketing campaign. We shouldn't be skewing the parameters of the trial to get the result we want.
On this point I have to agree. Lets not _speculate_ that GWB would be a train-wreak. Lets try it, and see if we learn anything from the experience. If we already had all the answers we wouldn't have any problems. ;)
Though I wouldn't recommend trying it _first_ nor would I recommend trying it while the press is talking about. Perhaps it would be an intolerable train wreak only because the press is spreading the name of that article around. It would be unfortunate if we reached incorrect conclusions on the effectiveness of pending vs protected on high traffic articles simply due to some temporary attention skew.