[WikiEN-l] Dispute resolution mailing list

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/6/27 stevertigo <stvrtg at gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
>> 2009/6/27 stevertigo <stvrtg at gmail.com>:
>>> You could start a thread called  "if it ain't broke don't fix it" and
>>> there
>>> we can debate whether the axiom applies to anything other than
>>> appliances.
>> That's not an axiom, it is a consequence of the definitions of "broke"
>> and "fix".
> Hm. So you are saying that "definitions have consequences?"

Yes. A logical argument generally starts by defining some terms and
stating a few axioms and following logical implications from those.

> Speaking of definitions: You also previously used the term "problem:" Every
> edit conflict is a "problem" and DR itself is almost the same as it was 5.7
> years ago.
> You also used the term "current system:" It is my understanding that a
> "convention" is not a "system."

I'm guessing you don't mean "edit conflict" as in when two people edit
the same page at the same time? You mean "edit *war*", yes? I don't
see why an old system is necessarily a bad one and you haven't
explained how your system would be better than the current one (which
is far more than just conventions, we have very clear policy on DR).