MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
True, we should care for newbies, but we should have
the good of the project
at number one. I can't find a single policy that we don't need (can you?).
Policies we don't need probably won't get promoted to policy to begin with.
:-D This statement was obviously meant as a joke
AFD is only as toxic as you make it. We should all
start by quiting 2-letter
nominations (NN) using lone jargon words (cruft, non-notable, etc) and start
explaining or reasoning based on references, google searches and specific
reasons that can be argued. If newbies come across reasonably argued
discussions in AFD the process would work a lot better.
Why should we expect newbies to have a doctorate in wiki-lawyering?
Reasonable arguments should not depend on the ability to cite policy cruft.
Ec