-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
geni wrote:
On 10/28/05, Alphax <alphasigmax(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
But it's perfectly OK to support someone who
says "I will delete any
article where there is a majority of delete votes, no matter what the
reasons are for the keep votes"?
Maybe.
I went looking through last week's AFD pages (eg. October 17-21). I saw
a few articles where the "majority" of votes were to delete, but the
last few votes included statements such as "keep, I have verified and
rewritten the article..." and "keep after excellent rewrite".
Are you telling me that you would have deleted such articles? Why don't
we actually go back to "votes for deletion" and implement voting
software for the page? If the process is so mechanical and requires no
brainpower whatsoever, why not just automate it?
(Oh yes, I forget to mention: I have a fully-functional auto-voter which
merely requires you to edit the AFD subpage in question. Contact me
off-list for details.)
- --
Alphax | /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 | X Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up | / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQEVAwUBQ2H92rMAAH8MeUlWAQhvVwf+MpsDkMnk1UF1V4N8fH8ZuKZIpidc2Qxz
bJ9bxYPBi2ENuctHOCfgOWBvklz9o29OmtZAjMHETSOAzHHC7pm6nRpW3z5hlpMx
1zBBsqTxfQ+S2eOxueMTibCIPbOCNTIOobU2L/5xJ+Q7aqooCQ5GLhj2E7Hw9zir
FX6OWxFfPkNdDjJoRHWOCK9iFNAIcRyEf8gx7xQ2DBl+Rig7Qy2vc3III1xzb3mk
tP+Ia6Xf4JHjGElzdTkXUEV7/YEr/eFSz390sD4AatY3oTxK4c1BlmBwIP/h+JzC
mwCGQAHDvrGAl3VsQ0mzix9RrfZQT2R+OjiQDg3qemYA4YY7uRK2gg==
=7sYw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----