Pete/Pcb21 wrote:
However I am really complaining that his actions, by
and large, have
succeeded. If he hadn't have behaved like that then
[[Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article]] wouldn't exist right now.
Well, is that really true? There were plenty of other paths for that
to exist, including working through the normal and proper channels.
It would have been easy for him to post a proper complaint about the
delay in doing that (or whatever) to this mailing list, or if he felt
that anyone in particular was being bad, he could have written to me
personally for support, and we could have made it a priority.
after the fact - doing nothing to change the policy in
a sort of "we
don't negotiate with vandals" style seems to be cutting off our nose to
spite our face.
That's right, it would be silly for us to say "Well, X is a good idea,
but the person who proposed it was behaving badly, so we refuse to do
it."
This is really a broader problem than just this type of case. We want
people to work *together*, not *adversarially* to bring about positive
change. We have to seek always to undercut the "red faction" type of
premise that civil disobedience to the fascist powers-that-be at
wikipedia (ha ha) is the only way to get things done.
--Jimbo