On 10/27/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/27/05, Anthony DiPierro wikispam@inbox.org wrote:
Like I said, I can come to accept it if the process is changed from consensus to majority rule. If you think Wikipedia should drop consensus
as
a goal, by all means make that argument.
I don't think it should be droped as a goal but I do think we should be realistic enough to accept that in certian areas it isn't going to happen.
I actually think a consensus approach toward deletion would be more efficient. It is essentially the approach used for speedy deletion, and a lot less time is wasted on speedy deletion. The problem with VFD is that individual articles are considered one at a time rather than considering the base questions and coming to agreement on that first. If we adopted a deletion standard, via consensus, saying what factors should be considered with regard to say a Webcomic, then a simple majority rules vote on whether or not a particular Webcomic fits those standards would be simple and efficient. Furthermore, if we want simply a majority rules system, then there are more efficient ways to do this as well. I proposed a representative system, for instance, so that not all Wikipedians have to monitor the process constantly, but they can elect representatives to vote for them. The representative could be chosen proportionally, so that all the different opinions could be represented. This alone would save tons of time, and it'd more fairly represent the opinions of everyone, as well. But as long as we delude ourselves into believe that our current system represents a consensus, things like this will be thrown out, because "Wikipedia isn't a democracy."
What I don't accept is redefining
the term consensus to mean majority rule. Anthony
And destory all the hard work on the wikipedia newspeak project?
-- geni