...

In the early days of Wikipedia before we had specific processes and guidelines, it was right and good that we were a free-for-all; we

were

...

in the process of discovering what works and what doesn't. But we're

...

in a new phase now. We have a process, and we know it can work, and

we

...

know what doesn't work. We should take advantage of that knowledge and /enforce/ the process we know works.

I don't really buy the "we need less freedom because we're wiser" argument. At least that what this argument seems to be saying.

Cunc, the problem I see is that smaller groups can enforce community standards through informal means, but larger groups can not.

As long as your group consists of less than 30-50 people -- the size of a small hunter gatherer tribe -- you can maintain relationships with everybody and that makes creating and enforcing social standards easier. But large groups just don't work that way. You can imagine a small village with no traffic laws, and it would work because people can fairly easily be aware of where they need to be careful, and the community will subtly enforce that behavior. But I can't possibly imagine a city the size of Detroit working without traffic laws, and people dedicated to making sure that those laws are followed.

I will agree with you, however, that this could easily be taken too far, and what we need to do is find an appropriate balance.

--Mark Christensen