[Wikipedia-l] takubot

[Takuya Murata]

>Fair enough.  We should make it more clear, then.
>
>Please keep in mind that our rules, including this one, are 
social
>norms that are sometimes informal, and don't get formalized 
until we
>have something that pushes us to get more formal.  I mean, 
there are
>so many possible things that people might do, for better or 
worse,
>that we can't (and shouldn't try) make a formal rule for 
everything in
>advance.

The last thing we want is a bureaucratic prodecure. I never 
advocate to formalize rules or detail them.

What frustrates me is that even though rules are not formal, 
they are applied, sometimes rigidly.

>"Get approval before running a bot" is a good idea.  
Approval from
>who?  Well, you know, some sysops.  One sysop?  Probably 
more than
>one?  From Jimbo?  No, not unless ultimately there's trouble
>establishing unanimity and we just need a ruling to get on 
with
>things.

My idea is again we should stop impling rules and stick to 
wiki style, which is act first then discuss and fix the 
problem.

I don't think it would work that those who want to use bots 
wait for a day or possiblly a week. Or maybe I just haven't 
seen working cases yet.

My current side is simply ban bots by ordinary wikipedians 
other than sysops. I believe the wiki way act first then fix 
is a basic premise and because bots can be too destructive, 
we can't apply the wiki way to it.

>Is this vague?

The problem is not rules are vague but the reasons of people 
apply it are.