On 10/27/05, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/27/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikispam(a)inbox.org> wrote:
Like I said, I can come to accept it if the
process is changed from
consensus to majority rule. If you think Wikipedia should drop consensus
as
a goal, by all means make that argument.
I don't think it should be droped as a goal but I do think we should
be realistic enough to accept that in certian areas it isn't going to
happen.
I actually think a consensus approach toward deletion would be more
efficient. It is essentially the approach used for speedy deletion, and a
lot less time is wasted on speedy deletion. The problem with VFD is that
individual articles are considered one at a time rather than considering the
base questions and coming to agreement on that first. If we adopted a
deletion standard, via consensus, saying what factors should be considered
with regard to say a Webcomic, then a simple majority rules vote on whether
or not a particular Webcomic fits those standards would be simple and
efficient.
Furthermore, if we want simply a majority rules system, then there are more
efficient ways to do this as well. I proposed a representative system, for
instance, so that not all Wikipedians have to monitor the process
constantly, but they can elect representatives to vote for them. The
representative could be chosen proportionally, so that all the different
opinions could be represented. This alone would save tons of time, and it'd
more fairly represent the opinions of everyone, as well. But as long as we
delude ourselves into believe that our current system represents a
consensus, things like this will be thrown out, because "Wikipedia isn't a
democracy."
What I don't accept is redefining
the term consensus to mean majority rule.
Anthony
And destory all the hard work on the wikipedia newspeak project?
--
geni