[Wikipedia-l] Proposed fork of Wikipedia

[Thomas Larsen]

Hi.

> I'm not so sure about that - you have to remember that people that are
> dissatisfied are always far more vocal than those than are satisfied.
> There are certainly a significant number of dissatisfied people, but
> maybe not as many as you think (I don't know how many you think there
> are, obviously, so I'm just guessing).

So let's not bother trying to guess the number of dissatisfied users
out there - there are undoubtedly thousands of people who would _not_
be satisfied if they knew what Wikipedia's community is like to work
with at times and how vandals can change the number "7" to the number
"2" in articles without the change being corrected for months or even
years. Let's just try to build a more reliable resource with a more
pleasant and productive environment, one that many people will be
happy working in.

> Oh, I agree, rules should always be as simple as possible. The "as
> possible" part is key, though - they need to be complicated enough to
> do the job.

Wikipedia's rules are _way_ too complicated: the only rules there that
I have ever fully read through, in nearly two years, have been V, N,
and NOR. Who's going to spend a day reading all of Wikipedia policy
pages, which are contradictory in places? If they aren't, then the
policies are practically purposeless; if they are, then we're creating
a bureuacracy by making people have to worry about procedure.

People say, "Abide by the spirit of the policies, not the letter," but
in this case why not make policies simple? If policies have a
"spirit", so to speak, why can they not be contained in three pages
instead of 50?

> Your constables will unilaterally delete articles they think don't fit
> the acceptability policy? In that case, you will certainly need a
> policy for arbitrating disputes!

Articles which obviously fail to fit the acceptability policy will be
deletable on sight by any constable. When constables receive a report
about a potentially violating article and are unsure about whether or
not it meets the acceptability policy, they will bring up the issue in
some public venue for, say, 24 hours and invite community input and
comments from other constables, then "follow the consensus".

Best and friendly regards,

Thomas