[WikiEN-l] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

[stevertigo]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:54 PM, David Gerard<dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, this is the state of consensus on the idea of a
> resolution-l:
> * one strong proponent (Stevertigo)
> * a couple of mild supporters (Fred Bauder, W. Johnson)
> * nobody else cares much
> * several people have suggested it would need consensus on the wiki to
> be a happener - no info on state of opinion on the wiki
> * no list created yet (mostly because of the tiny support)
> * SV alleges procedural suppression of the idea
> Anything I've missed?

Very nice, but a couple amendments are required:
* I am not a "strong proponent" - I am the proposer. Naturally I
consider the idea to be valid, or I would not have proposed it. And if
there is anything "strong" about my proposal, its in the fact that my
arguments are fairly sound, and my responses to the various criticisms
have been somewhat straightforward and satisfactory.
* IIRC George and SJ and maybe a couple others - notably Thomas - have
also expressed *some degree of support - as always with their own
ideas and points. And if he wasn't altogether retired, Jimbo would
probably also support it too.
* "Nobody else cares much" is perhaps accurate, perhaps not. Only the
supporters and opponents count - not the abstentions - and IMHO I've
been fairly successful at defeating the opposition's arguments anyway
- too often by simply pointing out the lack of any substantial
argument to speak of. If Lincoln destroys Douglas in debate, we
generally get a concession speech, but we don't generally expect or
get total conversion or support. Consider Planck's axiom about how
changes in scientific thinking happen not so much through changing
minds, but more through through scientist's eventual deceasing.
* The "no list yet" issue is largely in Cary's court, for the simple
reason that he is the person apparently in charge. Of course if a
person in charge of something is not actually doing what his
underlings tell him to do, then standard bureaucratic procedure
usually requires that they be promoted to higher office so they can do
less damage.
*  I allege no procedural suppression, for the simple reason that I
have no access to the private lists or emails. I do however allege
that if I did have access to those private channels, I could defeat
most of whatever privately made criticisms just as easily as I have
the open ones.

-Stevertigo