I feel strongly that nothing be done that will result in the loss of either of these
valuable contributers. I do think what they did was wrong, and that there should be
enforcement of guidelines against it, particularly regarding the general
unfriendliness/lack of civility. Perhaps too much emphasis is placed on the number of
reverts (almost all reversion is bad, IMO) and not enough on the unfriendly,
anti-intellectual nature of the discourse. I sided with VV in the particular partially
because he has consistantly been polite to me, and 172 distinctly negative and nasty, and
partially because I had not seen any convincing evidence of the claim against the U.S.
govt. It has been said by reliable persons (I don't feel 172 is reliable in regards to
contentious issues, altho he does produce reliable content generally) here on the mailing
list that there is good evidence showing that there was indeed US backing. If so there
should be a citation in the article, and the matter done with. In short, citations should
trump majority, and incivility is a bigger crime than reversion, but both need clear
guidelines and inforcement. Cheers, Jack
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! -
http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!