On 12/10/05, stevertigo <vertigosteve(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Brilliant. Really, really fucking brilliant!
I love it when people express radical and free ideas
which wont ever be tried unless by undemocratic
decree.
The only problem with it is that AFD people are are
there precisely because they are neither good article
progenitors nor good article editors. That's why we
call them "Deletionists" --because that's just what
they do. I attach no value judgement to the name of
"Deletionist" other than any pre-concieved social
prejudice that values creation over destruction.
Ergo, Creativity needs a mirror in Destruction
--taking away such a major function will mean that
those who have over time been driven to AFD (whatever
meaning one may give to "driven") will take their
skills of destruction to articles -- destructive
reverts, rollbacks, cutting etc.
All of which can be good--dont get me wrong--and
certainly putting doing these in balance is the best
kind of approach. But as they say in Go, a masterful
player will see the difference between a good move and
a bad one as like 'the difference between a feather
and a cinder block.' Not known for their
feather-sensitive sublety --Deletionists need
somewhere to go to do what it is they do.
Stevertigo
Blameing the deletionists. Not logical.
133 Inclusionists
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Inclusionist_Wikipedians/Memb…
94 Deletionists
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Deletionist_Wikipedians
Deletion requires a 2/3s majority. There is no logical way that the
deletionists should be able to win against the inclusionists.
--
geni