Charles Matthews <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > Well, I was keeping various things in mind. In our very own inane > jargon, WP:BOLD is qualified by "Often it is easier to see that > something is not right rather than to know exactly what /would/ be > right", which is something of a plea for measured responses, and WP:BRD > with "In a way, you're actively provoking another person with an edit > they may (strongly) disagree on [...]". I actually don't see that the > issue under discussion is a new type of issue. There is a new type of > context, which is what I hoped to be addressing.
BRD: Read "mitgated but still adversarial editing cycle" (see [[WP:PX]] bottom entry). As much as I agree with the issue, Jimbo's BOLD action appears to have been a shock to the systems of a great number of people who had all this time thought that seriously bold actions required consensus-first. Wikimedia. Hopefully Jimbo will soon write up his views as a formal argument and then in discussion we can weigh their validity. Just how arguments are weighed afterward is the interesting "context" as you put it. -SC _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
