On 10/7/07, Durova <nadezhda.durova(a)gmail.com> wrote:
What strikes me as curious is how people who assume
bad faith construe this
as a bluff.
I'm not assuming bad faith. Rather I am describing what I believe to
be the unintended result of a struggle in which I (thankfully) am not
part of. I'm not accusing you of bluffing either, in fact I sense that
you are a lot more serious about what you say than anybody else on
this mailing list.
I have a strong suspicion that if Wikipedia ever
implemented a mandatory recall
process, the same people who assume bad faith would either find exploits and
subvert it or, if they failed to find exploits, they'd complain that the process is
meaningless.
First of all this isn't going to happen, I'll bet all the tea in China
(PRC). Second, the exploits to this process will be, and always have
been, in plain sight of anybody seeking to use them. Third, yes, the
process is meaningless with or without clearly defined exploits, but
so is RFA, and besides, nobody here is going to agree on what does or
does not constitute an "exploit" in this or any other context.
—C.W.