-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
geni stated for the record:
On 1/20/06, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.org wrote:
geni stated for the record:
So no action against those who vote to keep stuff that should be deleted? Remeber a keep vote is worth more than a delete vot on AFD.
-- geni
No, no action. An erroneous "keep" is harms no one, since copyvios, attacks and libel, and similar damaging material are not subject to Votes for Deletion.
Have you ever tried to bring up issues of copyright violation on AFD? I have. I got kinda outvoted (to be fair the subject was to do with schools).
Hoaxes are subject to AFD. Are you going to claim that voteing to keep them does no damage?
-- geni
Good point. Allow me to modify my proposal accordingly: anyone whose vote shows a culpable lack of elementary research should be penalized. This would include both those who deleted Jimbo's example that began this discussion, and those who /carelessly/ vote "keep" on fraudulent material.
Note that in both cases "I did my research but that was too subtle" ought to be considered as a defense. For example, both "okay, so he's genuinely notable in Kyrgyzstan, but I don't read Kyrgyzyse and that's the only language he's been published in" and "okay, so it's a hoax, but numerous credentialed scientists were also taken in" would be considered as mitigating factors by the Review Board.
- -- Sean Barrett | I'm not a hero! I'm just an actor with a gun sean@epoptic.org | who's lost his motivation. --Bruce Baxter