On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Andrew Garrett <agarr...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen > <cimonav...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This is very very meta. But in my own defence, I haven't posted >> anything for over a year. Mourning my dearly departed mother. I have >> said before that monthly limits are prejudicial against those that >> rarely post, but do post when the expletive hits the fan; and do so >> with the full force of conviction they are expressing the views of the >> community. Nuff said. Go ahead and moderate this, if you like. > > It's all very well to say that you should be able to post as much as > you like when something you feel really passionate about comes up.
If you were to research the record, you would find I have posited quite moderate views on the "issue" of filtering content, even being quite doubtful I was in the right. I don't think it is an "issue" as such to be passionate about wanting the wikimedia community to not tear itself to shreds. I think it is just a fundamental matter, not merely an "issue". > > But if you can't get your point across in thirty posts over a month, > maybe it's time to stop trying. > I think people who think have got the point, but we still have to "whack the mole" at trolls and endless griefers. > These discussions have gone in circles for a month now, and it's the > same five or ten people (yes, I am again being rhetorical, please > don't bother checking that number) arguing past each other and posting > their entrenched positions again and again. It isn't the number of posters that you have got wrong, though it may be imprecise. We aren't talking about months here. This is a Perennnial Proposal, that is an elephant graveyard for *years* not months. There's no reason to think > that these loud people on foundation-l are representative of the > community at large. There's no reason to think that any of them are > likely to change their minds. And, as I say, at this point, they've > probably made their arguments as well as they can. I don't think many > people are even reading the discussion any more. > On that regard, the numbers are pretty much out. Loudness here is largely more representative, than a "referendum" that doesn't even ask the fundamental question. -- -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]] _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
