AFD functions well, and I'm surprised to see the never ending stream of
emails to this list complaining about the process. My only suggestion to
improve AFD is for it to have its own mailing list.
Some of AFD's features I find particularly appealing ...
* efficiently disposes of sewage - has a very low error rate
* satisfies the appetites of certain editors who crave visibility, drama and
social interaction
* is a wonderful soap box for bombasts to opine, prognosticate and listen to
themselves
* distracts the Fucking Idiots from more important parts of the encyclopedia
* provides a place for these animals to gnash their teeth and hump each
other
...while the rest of us write an encyclopedia.
Most of the complaining has been about the AFD process, when the real
problem is the behavior of the editors who are drawn there. If AFD was
reworked to eliminate the possibility of bitching, whining and sniveling,
this behavior might just move elsewhere in our project.
The current process, amazingly, motivates volunteer editors to passionately
evaluate tens of thousands articles per year. And while it's not perfect and
can probably be improved, it's pretty damn good.