[Foundation-l] Conflict resolution on meta Wikimedia

[Christiaan Briggs]

You didn't answer my question. You're not seriously suggesting that 
Gerard did not know about it are you?

The rest of your email didn't make sense to me. How does one purge 
debate while at the same announcing where it is in the opening 
paragraph?

Purge, in case you were unaware, means to remove. The only thing that 
has happened, on the advice of, Rowan Collins, is that it has been 
_moved_ so as discussion about technical implications is not drowned by 
Gerard's shrill.

Christiaan

David Gerard wrote:

> Christiaan Briggs:
>> David Gerard wrote:
>
>>> The desirability discussion presumably needs greater notice in the
>>> technical discussion.
>
>> You're not seriously suggesting that Gerard did not know about it are
>> you?
>
> As I explained in the bit you snipped, dividing the technical 
> discussion of
> how to implement a feature from the desirability of that feature in the
> first place may be seen as artificial and disingenuous. And it 
> certainly
> appears that this is being seen that way.
>
> Further (to say again the thing you snipped), continuing to discuss the
> implementation of a feature while purging note of the fact that its
> esirability is *strongly* contentious closely resembles an attempt to 
> make
> it a fait accompli.
>
> Also, you should note that - although I am certainly not saying this is
> your intention at all - trying to shift *all* criticism off to a 
> separate
> page is a favourite tactic of POV warriors on en: and in other places. 
> As
> such, your actions may be seen as highly reminiscent of that.
>
> I suggest you not try so hard to purge this technical page of all 
> mention
> of the highly contentious social debate it's concerned with 
> implementing
> one side of. i.e. "It hurts when I do this!" "Don't do that, then."
>
>
> - d.