I posted this on Jimbo's talk page and will post to WikBack, but I wanted to post here as well. I know that everyone is sick to death of hearing about this rollback business, but I'm a little confused as to why it's being allowed to continue. For such a contentious feature that has so bitterly divided the community, until it's finally been decided whether or not this even has consensus to go through, it seems to me that we should heed the advice of users, including myself, calling for a moratorium. Considering that we were never able to get a full-fledged discussion, and that the ArbCom case seems unlikely to be accepted (despite Jimbo's wishes that it be heard by them), our best bet is to wait until the end of the quarter, and have a new poll, as has been decided. In the meantime, though, we don't know what ramifications of giving all these users this tool will be; and until we've discussed everything fully, it doesn't make sense to let this continue. Thanks for your consideration.
Alex Sawczynec wrote:
I know that everyone is sick to death of hearing about this rollback business...
You're right.
we don't know what ramifications of giving all these users this tool will be
Almost certainly nil. But if not, we'll find out soon enough.
until we've discussed everything fully, it doesn't make sense...
It's now pretty abundantly clear that no amount of discussion will ever bring sense to this issue. (It's more or less fundamentally nonsensical.)
I'm a little confused as to why it's being allowed to continue.
Because it simply doesn't matter.
Don't get me wrong; I agree that it was (and is) a significantly bad idea. But again: it really doesn't matter one way or the other. At this point, it will only cause us problems if we insist on it, either by beating the dead horse of the discussion, or by erecting ever-higher levels of bureaucracy to "manage" the handing out and removing of the precious rollback bit. (Sadly, of course, neither of these two outcomes is unlikely.)
We hate hearing about the rollback thing so lets open yet another mailing list thread about it....................?
All of these major discussions just stop at some point. Look at the archives for this list.
On Jan 14, 2008 10:53 PM, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
Alex Sawczynec wrote:
I know that everyone is sick to death of hearing about this rollback business...
You're right.
we don't know what ramifications of giving all these users this tool will be
Almost certainly nil. But if not, we'll find out soon enough.
until we've discussed everything fully, it doesn't make sense...
It's now pretty abundantly clear that no amount of discussion will ever bring sense to this issue. (It's more or less fundamentally nonsensical.)
I'm a little confused as to why it's being allowed to continue.
Because it simply doesn't matter.
Don't get me wrong; I agree that it was (and is) a significantly bad idea. But again: it really doesn't matter one way or the other. At this point, it will only cause us problems if we insist on it, either by beating the dead horse of the discussion, or by erecting ever-higher levels of bureaucracy to "manage" the handing out and removing of the precious rollback bit. (Sadly, of course, neither of these two outcomes is unlikely.)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Jan 14, 2008 11:20 PM, Rjd0060 rjd0060.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
We hate hearing about the rollback thing so lets open yet another mailing list thread about it....................?
All of these major discussions just stop at some point. Look at the archives for this list.
Everything of seemingly little importance is actually utterly important to the encyclopaedia (see: userboxen, spoiler templates, BADSITES, rollback for non-admins). That is why they must be pursued to their natural conclusion doggedly, regardless of the costs.
In all seriousness, I have seen outcomes that I personally think undesirable in many cases. These things come and go. Would I like to see a re-evaluation of this fucked up rollback policy? Yes, and I'd like us to review how we look at people who link to websites which attack our users; I'd like us to review our incredibly retarded requirements for RfA; I'd like us to have an organisational structure that is better suited to the nature of our community; the list could go on and on.
The fact is, it is physically impossible for any of these things I like to come true within a reasonable timeframe, because of the nature of the project and the community. There is no sense in beating a dead horse if it won't make the horse come back to life.
The project has made a lot of stupid decisions in the past. We will continue making stupid decisions. I am personally inclined to disengage from the process once it's become clear we're sticking with the stupid decision.
Johnleemk