On 5/13/06, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/12/06, Anthony DiPierro
<wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
I think you're wrong that Jimbo has any ultimate power over Wikipedia.
Sure, if he wanted to ban someone he'd probably get away with it, but
only if the community accepted it.
You might want to reread the banning policy and some recent Arbcom cases.
The view that Jimbo cannot ban people by fiat or dictate Wikipedia policy is
a minority one. Those who disagree can fork.
All that you say is true, but being written on a Wikipedia page does
not make it fact.
Maybe I come off as a Jimbo defender or that I enjoy
the situation. In fact,
I don't have any feelings on it either way. He doesn't interfere with me
writing the encyclopedia, which is what I'm here to do.
And if it's such a pointless issue, then why does it have to be
addressed in the first place?
Because people take it so seriously that they edit war, wheel war, and leave
the project over it, as incomprehenible to me as that is.
And now that userboxes are banned, there's no more edit warring, wheel
warring, or people leaving the project?
It's as if the
result of this battle over userboxes will have any direct impact on the
quality of the articles. It won't. Whether userboxes stay or not, I really
wish we would all just let it go and write the fucking encyclopedia already.
The fact that some people spend so much time on the mailing list trying to
ensure that they get their way in this shitheap of an "issue" makes me
wonder what you are all really here to do.
Ryan
I really don't see anyone doing that. I'm more concerned with people
claiming that Jimbo is unilaterally passing CSD criteria despite a
lack of consensus than I am with what the CSD criteria are.
Anthony