On 5/6/06, Cheney Shill halliburton_shill@yahoo.com wrote: Nor are we in a position according to you to determine what crap is. After all, what we believe is crap today may very well to turn out to be bio-fuel or natural gas tomorrow. I'm simply setting forth one principle for determining what crap is. Besides, the real point of my recommendation in this context regarding pop-culture items (Pokemon, pop-stars, etc.) is to give them a holding place outside the encyclopedia itself that is still part of Wiki until we have better knowledge about where on the crap continuum they belong. I'm not recommending a flush, simply a split, and anything can be moved back to the encyclopedia and is of course still accessible and editable like any other Wiki content.~~~~Pro-Lick
Not at all. We are currently in a position to judge well old stuff- I can't remember the last time someone complained about "Ancient Greek-cruft" or "Renaissance-cruft", so while we certainly are still missing notable stuff from those areas, we don't seem to have a problem keeping out the non-notable crap stuff from that area. My argument was that we should try to filter out the lower levels of horrible speedyable obvious crap that it is really unlikely anyone will ever want, and leave the non-horrible crap that isn't harming anything for later time periods to judge the finer borderline cases. There's a practice in writing which is to bang out something and get it nice, and then just leave it alone, coming back much later with a fresh mind.
~maru