On 5/28/07, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
By the way, will anon article creation *ever* be switched back on? What's the problem?
A few discussions ago IIRC Jimbo said it would be reenabled when version flagging was implemented. Considering how slowyly version tagging itself is coming, I wonder if it was meant as some variant on "next year in Jerusalem." :)
More seriously, though, this disabling of anon article creation has bugged me from the start and is now IMO a prime example of both how _not_ to implement a major policy change. It was a knee-jerk response to bad publicity that didn't even address the issue that caused the bad publicity in the first place, and there was no plan for how to evaluate its actual effects. I've been told at several points that analysis was being done but I've never seen any results and no longer believe it.
It's been something like a year and a half now, I hate sounding like a broken record for such a long period.
I thought it addressed the fact that we can't keep up with our recent changes - a thing that stable versions would address.
Michael Snow is right though, we seriously need to give those devs some incentive to speed things up. On the other hand, do we really want them to do a rush job?