[Wikipedia-l] Suggestion for policy

[Robert Graham Merkel]

On Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:59:40 lcrocker at nupedia.com wrote:
> Yes, he is very annoying--all the more so because he's
> obviously well-educated and therefore hard to dismiss as
> an ordinary crackpot.  He hasn't been too terribly
> destructive.  He just cranks out reams and reams of
> subjectivist rants with quality inversely proportionate
> to their quantity.  But one or two sentences out of every
> page he writes actually has some interesting insight worth
> keeping, and he does put up with my abuse pretty well, so
> I haven't yet been tempted to suggest any action.
> 

He's driving me nuts...

> Besides, his anonymity will always serve to minimize his
> credibility, so he'll lose a lot of arguments on those
> grounds alone.  I know I've suggested in the past that
> perhaps only logged-in users should be allowed to edit,
> but I think I'm more inclined to leave things as they are,
> and just have a social norm here that anonymous editors
> should simply suffer the consequences to the credibility
> and lose arguments by default.

I consider it quite rude that whomever it is doesn't do us
the courtesy of registering even a nom de plume and clearly
label his points on the talk pages.  It makes having a discussion
with him/her/it a PITA as you can't immediately distinguish
who is saying what.

Is it time to make it wikipedia policy that you should sign
your posts on talk pages?


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Merkel	                           rgmerk at mira.net

Go You Big Red Fire Engine
-- Unknown Audience Member at Adam Hills standup gig
------------------------------------------------------------