MZMcBride wrote: > No, it really isn't a legitimate concern.
Contrary to your claim that "nobody cares," some of us obviously do. Does this mean that we're in on the conspiracy, or have we merely been brainwashed to go along with it? Or is it possible that people simply disagree with you in good faith? > To hear that feature naming has suddenly become an issue sounds like > bullshit to me. You cited various MediaWiki elements whose names are/were less than optimal. Have you considered that perhaps the Wikimedia Foundation is attempting to learn from its mistakes and get this one right? > The worst that happens? A few power-users confuse their terminology. The feature's deployment likely will be reported in mainstream media, so its name's impact will extend far beyond the small percentage of the population that edits the wikis. > Think I'm wrong? Prove it. I seek to prove nothing. I have no crystal ball and cannot predict whether there will be further delays. This is irrelevant to your assertion that the Wikimedia Foundation is "erecting pseudo-hurdles" to this end, for which the burden of proof is on you (and for which an announcement that "we really need to have a name fully locked down no later than Friday, May 28" is not compelling evidence). David Levy _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
