[Foundation-l] Pending Changes development update: September 27

[Risker]

On 28 September 2010 18:10, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Without having formed in opinion either way to what has come out of the
> trial or the straw polls, I don't understand why there is such importance
> placed on *technically* disabling the feature.  If en.WP doesn't want to use
> it, why don't they not just move all the articles back to semi-protection?
>  Empty out the pending changes from the on-wiki interface. This would likely
> have to be done *before* disabling it anyways. Just because the extension is
> installed doesn't mean it has to be used. I can see no reason why Erik or
> Danese should be being asked to determine consensus.
>

Nobody was asking Erik or Danese to determine consensus. They were asked to
give their word that our consensus would be respected after the polling of
the community following a second trial. Consensus doesn't mean majority
rule, as has always been very clear on this project.

It's now on record that any further trials are moot, and that the tool is
going to be left in place with absolutely no intention of disabling it
regardless of the wishes of the project.



>
> I get that this is an important political issue for various people.  I
> don't get why the devs are being focused on.  Please let the devs out of the
> argument. I can't imagine why any of them would want to touch that button
> with a ten-foot pole until you have clearly decided.  Especially as it isn't
> really necessary for them to be involved in achieving a negative result.
>
>
The developers were being focused on because they have been the face of this
project from Day One, and all communication with the community has been
through them.

Risker/Anne