[WikiEN-l] We need a policy to deal with new policies
halliburton_shill at yahoo.com
Fri May 5 18:08:43 UTC 2006
geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/5/06, David Gerard wrote:
> 2. Process is good, but more process is *BAD*. Process grows like
> bindweed and must be culled regularly. Anyone who says "process is
> important" must read and understand [[m:Instruction creep]].
Since m:Instruction creep relates to process they probably have. The
broad principle is correct (although I quite like our overgrown and
contradictory guidelines it means it is almost imposible to produce a
solid case based on them to stop me doing what I want to do) the
anicdote doesn't tend to apply wikipedia (It is generaly less complex
to remove someone from wikipedia rather than get a new policy
Are you saying this is "good"? Instruction creep could easily be retitled tax code creep or bureaucrat creep. Tossing people into the torture chamber doesn't seem like a reasonable solution to dealing with a process problem, especially if the intent (AGF) is to cleanup (de-weed) the process.
> 3. Grey areas exist; the human brain exists to deal with them. You
> can't Taylorise clue.
However you can produce rigidly defined areas of doubt and
uncertainty. It is possible to define where the grey areas are.
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates.
More information about the WikiEN-l