No subject

people to be bold. This is an inherently inclusionist perspective where we
assume that bold editors who write awful, inaccurate or mediocre stuff are
still making valuable contributions. They are either contributing cruft
which is easy to get rid of, or they are contributing seeds for some future
editor to improve, or seeds for conversations on the talk page that will in
time result in high quality content. Or if we're lucky, they are not only
bold but really smart and only capable of producing brilliant prose. In
short, in the limit of time any contribution is a good contribution. Even
the worst contribution you can think of (which is probably engineered to
stick but blatantly false) is going to eventually be tagged as vandalism and
will help contribute to future intelligent algorithms that automatically
weed out vandalism.