On May 2, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Kelly Martin wrote:
In my opinion calling content contributed in good
faith by our
valued
contributors "cruft" is incivil. It sends the clear message that
their contributions, and by extension themselves, are valueless.
Why
can't you just say "Not suitable for inclusion in the
encyclopedia due
to limited scope of interest"?
My understanding was that "not suitable for inclusion in the
encyclopedia due to limited scope of interest" was the definition of
"cruft".
And "shit" can mean "fecal matter" or just "stuff I don't
like".
Doesn't mean calling something "shit" when you really mean "stuff I
don't like" isn't incivil.
My point was that many people, including (apparently) myself and the
person who started this entire thread, never knew that "cruft" had
any meaning *apart from* "not suitable for inclusion in the
encyclopedia due to limited scope of interest"
--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch