MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
True, we should care for newbies, but we should have the good of the project at number one. I can't find a single policy that we don't need (can you?). Policies we don't need probably won't get promoted to policy to begin with.
:-D This statement was obviously meant as a joke
AFD is only as toxic as you make it. We should all start by quiting 2-letter nominations (NN) using lone jargon words (cruft, non-notable, etc) and start explaining or reasoning based on references, google searches and specific reasons that can be argued. If newbies come across reasonably argued discussions in AFD the process would work a lot better.
Why should we expect newbies to have a doctorate in wiki-lawyering? Reasonable arguments should not depend on the ability to cite policy cruft.
Ec