Quoting Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com:
I'm not saying the solution is to walk away from things you care about. But the BADSITES issue clearly will not die; we've got people on both sides who haven't budged an inch in their positions (myself included) and who are apparently willing to trot out the same arguments in endless repetetition until the cows come home. We've all got to get off that treadmill somehow.
Well, I don't know about that. My view on BADSITES has changed at least. I started out very much in favor of some variant of BADSITES, but as I watched the arguments develop I became more and more convinced that BADSITES was a bad idea both ideological and pragmatically (there may have been some belief overkill on my part). What we really have is a much more serious problem- not that people won't change their views (it happens occasionally and frankly the vast majority of humans almost never change their views on almost anything), the real problem is that we've had in a variety of issues we've had groups of people who seem to be treating Wikipedia almost as a game of chess, and are willing to use their superior knowledge of the rules to impose something which clearly has no consensus. And then, after they get checkmate, they claim they have a consensus. This isn't productive. We need people to be more willing when there isn't a consensus to say "Hey, I've got a strong opinion this. There isn't a consensus, I'll wait until there is before making broad sweeping policy claims".