I don't remember coming to an agreement they should be protected, either (though I've recently had a blow to the head). ;-) I've seen them vandalized a few times, then reverted. One issue I have with their protection is that it seems to imply that the policies are etched in stone, when in fact one of the "rules" of wikipedia is to ignore all rules if rules make you uncomfortable.

Yet the policy pages are protected. I think they call that [[cognitive dissonance]]. I'm tempted to ignore an unwritten rule now.

kq

Stephen wrote:

I don't recall ever having a problem with people changing policies unilaterally, so I guess I don't see any good reason to have these pages frozen. I do, however, see some problems with it.