Look, I only did this because Timwi specifically requested me to make a list of violations and links to policy pages-- see his previous posts. I had NO desire to spend hours on this very dry task, and I would not have if no one had asked for it. I'm not obsessing on it. Readers of this list are free to ignore it if they wish, and I've tried to make that clear in my posts. I think it's better to ignore posts that don't interest you than to criticize people for posting something uninteresting to you.
I was directed here after a friend of Jimbo's thought I should contribute to the (currently pretty one-sided) Reagan article. If my contribution has now taken the form of Q/A on the Wikipedia social system, then so be it, but that's definitely not what I came here for. It can, however, be constructive, if anyone chooses to follow up on it; that's not my choice one way or the other.
James
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004, Ray Saintonge wrote:
RS> James Marshall wrote: RS> RS> >Okee dokee, here are some of the violations I found in the recent RS> >unpleasantness. Some are more important than others, and some are RS> >stronger cases than others. But in no particular order, and in an ad hoc RS> >format, here's what I came up with in the last couple of hours: RS> > RS> > RS> >First, not a violation, but Timwi specifically asked about policies RS> >encouraging additions and discouraging deletions. To clarify, I didn't RS> >mean a hard-and-fast rule-- of course some deletions are good and some RS> >additions are bad. But it's a theme I picked up a few times on various RS> >newbie and policy pages. I'll see if I can find the references again. RS> > RS> >... OK, here are some: RS> > RS> (long snip) RS> RS> Please stop obsessing on this. Notwithstanding the truth and validity RS> of what you say people only go so far in reading this kind of stuff. RS> Those who frequent the mailing lists have heard it all before, and can RS> become impatient when it comes to reading these long diatribes of RS> defence. They are counterproductive to your cause. RS> RS> You would do better to simply devote your time to editing real RS> articles. Avoid hot-button items until after you have become better RS> known, or have some track-record in less controversial areas. RS> RS> Ec RS>