Bryan Derksen wrote:
geni wrote:
On 11/1/05, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Your ratio of controversial articles seems about right. The problem is in the tenacity with which controversial deletions are protected. No damage would be done by allowing the controversial ones more time, or allowing them to be easily undeleted for further discussion for as long as it takes.
Prolonginf conflict is not a good idea.
It would depend on the circumstances of the conflict, wouldn't it? In cases where there's genuine debate going on, it doesn't make sense to arbitrarily cut it off at some deadline rather than letting it continue until a clear decision is reached. If it stalemates then perhaps a deadline can come into play but it shouldn't be required as a universal solution.
"Conflict" is not inherently bad, it's part of how disagreements can be resolved.
Conflict becomes bad when the conflict itself becomes more important than the subject of the conflict. Some domestic arguments manage to carry on even after the spouses have forgotten what the argument was about.
Ec