What do you need? Evidence that Wikipedia has survived for years?
Evidence that its decline is not so rapid as to indicate an emergency
situation? Quotes from Erik where he states that he disrupted English
Wikipedia in order to create a test bed? The first two are judgement
calls, for the third there's an embarrassment of riches. Let me know
what you need.
KWW
----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Wayne
Williams"
<kwwilliams(a)kwwilliams.com>
To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Visual Editor "temporary" opt-out
Op 2013/08/05 23:44, MZMcBride schreef:
This leaves us to consider the biggest question:
opt-in vs. opt-out.
Erik and James are both quite smart, they are true Wikimedians, and
they make reasonable points about choosing opt-out over opt-in.
This is the point
on which we fundamentally disagree. Their argument
for 'opt-out' is based solely upon the quality and quantity of
testing that it affords to VE. VE is not a mission-critical feature:
while we have concerns about Wikipedia's sustainability, there's no
question that it has survived for years and will survive for years
more. The stability of the site is much more important than testing
this code, and the testing strategy of presenting it as if it was
functioning software and seeing what people did with it wasn't a
reasonable decision: it was completely and absolutely irresponsible.
KWW
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>