On 12 March 2012 08:44, Ray Saintonge <sainto...@telus.net> wrote: > On 03/11/12 3:36 AM, WereSpielChequers wrote: > >> As opposed to the majority who supported the idea of >> stopping editors creating articles until they'd been autoconfirmed, and >> who >> believe in template bombing newbies articles or simply reverting their >> edits as "unsourced". >> > > It's unfortunate that idiots with this kind of attitude have taken over > the asylum. These negativists who do this without ever making positive > contributions to the project deserve a similar treatment. > > Ray > > > I dispute the idea that they have. WSC says that the majority of editors support this idea. We know this is incorrect; if it was true, the majority of editors would have supported it when given the opportunity - as opposed to >400 people. This is a sizeable number, yes, but it is a tiny, tiny minority of those editors who contribute to Wikipedia. What we have is a communications divide between a small minority who get involved in governance and a large majority who, by and large, do not. This is a vast divide, and it is not safe to assume we can accurately predict the opinions of the majority based on those of the minority.
Now, if you want to say "of all the users who commented, the majority..." then that's fine. But it's a mistake to argue that those who shout loudest shout for all of us. -- Oliver Keyes Community Liaison, Product Development Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
