I think it's relative (like everything, anyway) When we were discussing about image filter I remember over one hundred-mails. It was a good discussion. It would be hilarious if someone speak ''Hey everybody, we exceed the thirty messages soft limit, let's end this discussion right now.'' :P
Some debates are big and the consensus doesn't come easy, what could we do? Suddenly stop? A ''soft'' limit is always great, but in some cases is not applicable. _____________________ MateusNobre Wikimedia Brasil - MetalBrasil on Wikimedia projects (+55) 85 88393509 30440865 > Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:55:26 +0100 > From: dger...@gmail.com > To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] moderation soft limit > > On 25 October 2011 17:52, Andreas K. <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > For those interested, there is a current request for arbitration on English > > Wikipedia related to the board resolution on controversial content, which > > contains some further views and discussion. I have summarised my view that > > our illustrations, just like our texts, should follow good practice > > established in reliable sources here: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=457335488#Statement_by_Jayen466 > > > And the AC summarised theirs: 0 accept, 6 decline. As tends to happen > when people go forum-shopping. > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l