[WikiEN-l] request to Jimbo for out-of-process deletion of image

Fri Apr 7 19:31:06 UTC 2006

Jimmy Wales wrote:

>Thanks Steve, and I want to make super clear that I think people can in
>good faith have quite varied opinions on different matters.
>
>What I wanted to point out is that we need to be especially vigilent
>when we have an area where we know there are POV pushers and trolls who
>are active.  As Erik pointed out, in a lot of cases like this, a tiny
>turnout at IfD will mean that community consensus is not well reflected,
>because the POV pushers will show up in force to override the small
>number of good editors who come by.
>
>Imagine this case:
>100 good editors, 80 voting delete, 20 voting in good faith to keep
>4 pov pushers
>4 trolls
>
>End result: 80 - 28, consensus to delete
>
>versus
>
>10 good editors, 8 voting delete, 2 voting in good faith to keep
>4 pov pushers
>4 trolls
>
>End result: 8 - 10, no conclusion, image kept
>
Such results are plausible, but establishing a series of rules just to 
deal with trolls and POV pushers is not likely to be productive.  It 
would be far better to allow them their votes, but to marginalize the 
effects of their votes.  This constant group of 8 miscreants seems to be 
winning in the second example because they were quick off the mark with 
putting in their votes.  Keeping votes open indefinitely will mean that 
they can't use their quickness to their advantage.  If the image is 
meant to be deleted the Wisdom of Crowds will prevail over an extended 
period of time.

Ec