On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 13:46:01 +0100, you wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 21:41:03 -0500, you wrote:
> Which does more harm, having and fighting over an article which has
> been accused by some in good faith of actively contributing to the
> mimetic process, or stepping back and having nothing to do with it?
If "stepping back" means banishing the topic
from Wikipedia, then I
would consider such a precedent potentially very harmful.
I don't see it being banished, I see Jimbo saying let's all walk away
and come back if anyone still cares in a year. What's the rush? My
view is that no topic should be added until at least a year after it
happens, in order to allow formation of a proper perspective, there is
no rush to scoop anyone. Wikinews is that way ----->
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG