--- Mark Gallagher
<m.g.gallagher(a)student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
Dont make this
personal.
Fair enough. It wasn't really called for, was it?
Bit childish of me, there.
I much appreciate that! Let us you and I henceforth
agree to not be dicks, either by dickishness itself or
by accusal thereof.
What Cobb was alluding to --- always and only --- is
his inability to get all fancruft deleted
immediately.
Ah. Well thats... practical.
I guess I now would be a good time for me to make note
of some 'Pediacruft (self-refs), wikicruft (references
to wiki tknlgy), and Jimbocruft (fans apparently).
Nah, I wont mention it.
Fair enough.
We have to come up with a better term for "newbie
indoctrination" though.
What you see as "making an argument weak" I
see as
trying not to get those you're trying to convince
off-side.
Yeah, I can see that. But that doesnt really work when
dealing with POV pushers. If the issue is adherence to
POV, my addition of [[Category:Anti-French people]]
for example should be rightly seen as POINT and not as
POV.
Naturally someone can report me to the Arbcom for
POINT, and get me deadminned or something like that
without much consideration of NPOV. If we really need
to 'kick out bad writers', what good does it do when
not just the Arbcom, but the whole community fails to
understand or apply some basic NPOV?
I agree what you said in another email that "the
Trifecta" is simple and therefore effective for
newbies. But what we have yet to do IMHO is to
elaborate more on NPOV as our most elevated,
trancendent and fundamental core doctrine,
by way of drills, practices, examples, and organized
religion-style propaganda.
-Stevertigo
PS: I could just go ahead and edit-integrate the
policy pages though myself but Im lazy.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com