[WikiEN-l] Here's an interesting one

[David Gerard]

Andrew Gray wrote:

>Clearly you didn't get the memo.
>[[Wikipedia:Off-Wiki policy discussion considered harmful]]
>(Next up: someone to argue speeding laws don't count because they were
>passed by people who were stationary at the time.)

    http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html

"Because "considered harmful" essays are, by their nature, so
incendiary, they are counter-productive both in terms of encouraging
open and intelligent debate, and in gathering support for the view
they promote. In other words, "considered harmful" essays cause more
harm than they do good."

"Typically, "considered harmful" essays gets written because someone
has an axe to grind, and they feel like making that grinding process
both public and dogmatic. This is a form of grandstanding, of course,
but it is done with a purpose beyond simple publicity seeking. Usually
such "considered harmful" essays are intended to draw attention to a
little-known subject about which the author is passionate, or to
highlight what the author feels to be a poor decision by someone else.
In addition, there are those "considered harmful" essays that are
written as part of a long-running argument that has gradually
escalated."

(and yes, I put that on the wiki too)


- d.