Cimon Avaro (Jussi-Ville Heiskanen) wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
>Undeletion should never require more official
validation than deletion.
The inclusion of the word "never" in your
argument; and the absence of a
stated justification for your view; suggests that your position is a
dogmatic one. Am I mischaractericising your attitude?
Yes, you are. I will clarify.
The word "never" indicates that I consider a matter of principle.
I don't merely mean that I don't think that this should happen
''now'' --
I mean that it should ''never'' happen. On principle.
Of course, principles can be challenged, and I might change my mind.
Thus this is not the same as dogma.
I left out stating any justification, because I hoped (and believed)
that the principle, once mentioned, would be widely viewed as correct.
If somebody challenges the principle (or its application to this case),
then I would want to respond with justification for my position.
If I expected people to change their minds ''without'' doing so,
then that would be dogamatic. But I don't.
I half expected you to say «When you put it that way, I agree.» --
on grounds of principle. And I half expected you to say
«I disagree with that principle. What are your justifications?» --
and then I would justify it. As it is, you began a meta-discussion
about my attitude. That's OK, The Cunctator does the same thing. ^_^
But I'll elaborate on the principle anyway, since I'm talking.
The main principle is this:
: On a wiki, undoing an action should always be as easy as doing it.
We violate this in various ways -- page creation, for one thing,
which is what deletion undoes. But that is handled by the software
in completely different ways, so there's a reason to violate principle.
But that's because software needs trump other principles:
: When the Right Thing is impracticable, then do the Wrong Thing for now.
-- Toby