On 7/29/06, Peter Ansell ansell.peter@gmail.com wrote:
That was a joke right? You can't just wait forever because someone "might" come. Policies in the real world have to be made in some finite timespace. Half of wikipedia's problems may indeed come from the fact that policies are argued over endlessly, through opinions like yours that the more argument/time and effort spent, the better the situation will "possibly be". Ever heard of the concept of diminishing returns, and/or the concept of negative return on investment.
With the exception of certain core policies laid down by Jimbo / the Foundation, all other Wikipedia policies and guidelines are subject to review and possible change. Where's the gain in being crippled by policy made by a contributing pool of maybe ten people three years ago that you can't change?
IMO, policies should always be changeable - but should default to not changing unless real support for a change materialises, not just because one or two argumentative people don't agree.
-Matt