[WikiEN-l] Flagged revs poll take 2

[Andrew Turvey]

No, my argument is not spurious - it's to the point. We operate in a community, and there are plenty of things I would do differently too if I had my way with everything. There's zero point in pursuing proposals that are strongly opposed by a significant section of the community. "Majority" (50%+1) is not good enough for something as important as this. 

As another poster said: "Dont break the community". Flagged revisions and the increasing trend towards deletionism are the two developments that have the greatest risk of doing exactly that. 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "doc" <doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> 
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, 31 March, 2009 23:45:19 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal 
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged revs poll take 2 

Your argument is spurious. 

It may well be that this proposal is the only one that would pass - but 
that neither means that it is good, nor that it is a good thing that it 
is passing. 

The proposal IMO is damaging to the cause of using flagged revisions in 
a manner that will help BLP victims. 

Doing nothing would be better than this. 

Your argument is the logical fallacy that because "something must be 
done" means "anything is better than the status quo", or that "any 
movement is a step in the right direction" - which does not consider 
that one can move, and move in the wrong direction. 


Andrew Turvey wrote: 
> And yet this poll seems to have significantly more support across the board than any other proposal that has been put forward. If there's another way of taking it forward that would have sufficient support, let's hear it. 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "doc" <doc.wikipedia at ntlworld.com> 
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org> 
> Sent: Monday, 30 March, 2009 23:23:31 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal 
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged revs poll take 2 
> 
> Nathan wrote: 
>> Two more problems: 
>> 
>> 1) This just barely made it on the watchlist notice, with a whopping one day 
>> for further participation. 
>> 
>> 2) None of the details on how the trial will actually work have been 
>> determined. Questions and opposition along these lines have been primarily 
>> met with "We'll work that out when the poll closes." 
>> 
>> Nice. 
>> 
>> Nathan 
>> 
>> (expanded opinion at 
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Avruch/FlaggedRevs_vs._NPP) 
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> WikiEN-l mailing list 
>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org 
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: 
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l 
>> 
> 
> 
> First sensible response I've seen to this. I thought I was on my own as 
> being a determined BLP warrior (or worrier) who opposed this ridiculous 
> thing. 
> 
> It seems to be a victory of "something must be done - and this is 
> something" over common sense. 
> 
> This does nothing at all for BLP subjects, screws flagged revisions, and 
> introduces a nightmare, all at once. 
> 
> Nice indeed. 
> 
> Scott 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> WikiEN-l mailing list 
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l 
> _______________________________________________ 
> WikiEN-l mailing list 
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l 
> 


_______________________________________________ 
WikiEN-l mailing list 
WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org 
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l