From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com AFD only doesn't scale for people who want to vote on all listed articles. Only vote for articles that need the votes and to ones where you can add something to the discussion.
This is pretty much what I do. My interest in AfD waxes and wanes, but if I look at AfD at all, you may take it as given that I have glanced at every discussion for an entire day. I probably participate in less than one in ten.
*I don't participate if there is already obvious consensus and it's clear which way the discussion will go. (But if it's important to me I will put it on my watchlist).
*I don't participate if I truly am indifferent to the outcome of the particular nomination.
*I don't participate if I am not in a position to make an informed judgement, _and_ the subject is of so little interest to me that I can't spare ten minutes to start to educate myself about it.
*I _do_ participate if it's something that is _almost_ a speedy and there are only a couple of votes there already. (FIRST POST!!!!)
*I _do_ participate if I'm aware of possessing some relevant fact about the article or topic that has not already been mentioned by another participant.
*I _do_ participate if I click on the article and it makes a very different impression on me than it made on the nominator.
*I _do_ participate if the article arouses my curiosity. (I enjoy improving/rewriting/"rescuing" AfD's _if it's a topic that happens to pique my interest_.)
*I'm afraid that I _do_ participate if I see a number of "votes" that give no rationale, or a bad rationale. These are probably my least useful comments.
-- Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith@verizon.net "Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print! Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/
On 9/21/05, Daniel P. B. Smith dpbsmith@verizon.net wrote:
From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com AFD only doesn't scale for people who want to vote on all listed articles. Only vote for articles that need the votes and to ones where you can add something to the discussion.
This is pretty much what I do. My interest in AfD waxes and wanes, but if I look at AfD at all, you may take it as given that I have glanced at every discussion for an entire day. I probably participate in less than one in ten.
*I don't participate if there is already obvious consensus and it's clear which way the discussion will go. (But if it's important to me I will put it on my watchlist).
*I don't participate if I truly am indifferent to the outcome of the particular nomination.
*I don't participate if I am not in a position to make an informed judgement, _and_ the subject is of so little interest to me that I can't spare ten minutes to start to educate myself about it.
*I _do_ participate if it's something that is _almost_ a speedy and there are only a couple of votes there already. (FIRST POST!!!!)
*I _do_ participate if I'm aware of possessing some relevant fact about the article or topic that has not already been mentioned by another participant.
*I _do_ participate if I click on the article and it makes a very different impression on me than it made on the nominator.
*I _do_ participate if the article arouses my curiosity. (I enjoy improving/rewriting/"rescuing" AfD's _if it's a topic that happens to pique my interest_.)
*I'm afraid that I _do_ participate if I see a number of "votes" that give no rationale, or a bad rationale. These are probably my least useful comments.
-- Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith@verizon.net "Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print! Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Good to hear, in my opinion most of those are excellent reasons to enter a particular discussion.