[Wikipedia-l] Article count: Vote result

[Thomas Corell]

Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Oh, I think publishing the names as we go is a very good thing.  I
> think possible influences are good.  If people I respect are voting
> differently from me, it may give me pause.  If people I don't respect
> are voting the same as me, it may give me pause.
The programmer inside me cries "deadlock";) You wait until some/all of 
the respected and some/all of the others made their vote, to know what 
you will vote? If this will be done by everyone, voting won't work.

I think time for influences is in the discussion before the voting and 
not during voting. But this topic isn't realy important in case of 
wikipedia desissions.

For example: one important thing (IMHO) for Wikipedia is the speed of a 
database request. In the voting and in the discussion about the Article 
count nobody calculated the complexity of some of the options. I think 
some of the admins will refuse methods for this count which will need a 
lot of performance. And I would respect such a decision.

Smurf
-- 
  --- Anthill Inside! ---