It is premature to discuss the details when we have no actual experience. Enthusiasm can compensate for structural inadequacies, and carry us till we get the details correct. We will need to make the effort of faith a little, for it is not likely we will get things right at first, and a strong for such enthusiasm, is to avoid having to do more drastic remedies, such as deleting articles before there is a chance to get them sourced, or disallowing unregistered editors.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:29 AM, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
doc wrote:
That someone has xn edits only means that they have not (yet) behaved in a manner to get blocked. It in no sense is equal to clue, perceptiveness, or diligence.
Such a view would institutionalize an assumption of bad faith.
The problem with widespread flagging is that in order to prevent backlogs, you will be under pressure to maximise the reviewers, and give the reviewers incentives to rack up numerous reviews per minute. That is inconsistent with useful scrutiny.
That's a speculative view, probably not supported by any evidence.
Ec
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l