[WikiEN-l] Bureaucrats decide!

[Marc Riddell]

> On 4/12/07, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
>> There are large aspects of Wikipedia ttat are dominated by people's
>> whose opinions should be discounted completely as the destructive
>> idiocy that they are.

on 4/11/07 8:51 PM, Erik Moeller at erik at wikimedia.org wrote:
> 
> No, that kind of culture of hostility is what we must guard against.
> The opinions against WP:OFFICE were misdirected. But the concerns
> about the process are valid & merit open debate. They should be
> directed to foundation-l, the WP:OFFICE talk page, and so forth.
> WP:OFFICE is a very first hackish attempt to solve a complex problem.
> The flaws of the process have been unfairly projected at Danny, who
> was not the architect of the policy.
> 
> The same principle applies in many debates; for example, many AfD
> comments are really concerns about specific Wikipedia policies such as
> notability, which very much are in need of revision and reform. Direct
> and instruct people to talk about these problems in the right places,
> and you may get useful results. Telling them to shut up because they
> perpetuate "destructive idiocy" breeds hostility and contempt.
> 
> There are destructive idiots. When recognized, they should be banned
> from Wikipedia. All other users should be treated with respect and
> understanding. I'm worried about the idiots. But I'm more worried
> about the erosion of a culture of respect that has been essential to
> Wikipedia's success as a community.

Yes! Wonderfully said, Erik. The key word, for me, in this is "destructive".
An opinion cannot be destructive - only action based on that opinion can be.

Marc Riddell