Jonathan + Adrian -- thank you for the thoughtful ideas. Seconding that: ~ We could use warmer, less confusing ways to handle edit conflicts, deletion, and edit wars ~ We have the luxury of trying many approaches in different places, and iterating
Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
You want a revolution to make Wikipedia a friendlier place?...
There is no such place... Have you been to a city?
Yes. Some disarmingly well-designed and welcoming, despite their density. The question is not whether better equilibria exist; they do. It is why they are often hard to recognize, try out, and adopt. Your insistence that 'there is no such place' is quite extraordinary, really: and highlights the challenge.
Todd Allen writes:
Well, inclusionism generally is toxic.
<laugh> Smooth redefinition of terms. Jonathan's proposal was so kind + specific, and you're spoiling for a fight. Most of us have an opinion on inclu/delight, and would be glad to debate it, but this thread isn't the place.
Pierre-Selim:
can people participating to this thread respect the soft limit of this
mailing list, i.e. this is not a chat
Thanks for the reminder. More than one post per day in a thread is probably too much...