On 8/28/07, Aude <audevivere(a)gmail.com> wrote: Agreed. That tone is inexcusable, no matter who says it, no matter where. -- Toward Peace, Love & Progress: Erik DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

On 28/08/2007, Aude <audevivere(a)gmail.com> wrote: I like the concept behind the project, but until it becomes a more reasonable place to expend effort as a volunteer, I'm not going to launch back in to full time contributions. The fact is that Wikipedia cannot magically operate smoothly without doing away with this mistaken ideology that random editors can force sensible policies to coalesce. What it needs is the "Wiki model" not to be used for policy, and for dedicated operators of the project, preferably with relevant expertise and credentials to be appointed, sit down and form set-in-stone ideals (or at least difficult to adjust, or with a formal method for adjustment) for the project, and then state them clearly (as the project will be biased as a result - fine as long as the bias is recognised - attempts can even be made to make up for it). Article content would continue to be worked on using the Wiki model, and disagreements would be more easily dealt with from the point of view of simple clearly defined policies rather than ones so complicated and contradictory as to allow essentially arbitrary results from disputes based on the most persistent or influential parties in the dispute. At present Wikipedia suffers the same problems and more as any other operation as regards bias and ideology, but problematically these are not clear to outsiders (or even insiders) and not even consistent (certainly whatever unstated principles people were adhering to when I began are not the ones that are used now). I recently re-read WP:POINT and found it to be a hideous draconian piece of nonsense that can be used against basically anyone if there's enough people applying it to them. I look forward to when I can justify spending my time freely on Wikipedia again. Time I can otherwise use for a great many things. Wikipedia's main contribution to me has been to instill a deep distrust of any new phenomenon or Internet craze. There's no way I'm going near Citizendium for example until it's firmly established it's credibility amongst my peers. Even then I'll probably wait - my peers too were taken in by Wikipedia at the beginning. I feel like the dwarves in the Narnia book, "The Last Battle". Although I'm pretty certain my cynicism towards all "Web 2.0" nonsense is entirely justified - it's almost the exact phrasing for " Dot.com rerun" Zoney -- ~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...