> 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. > > This argument is absurd. You dismiss the opinions of those who bother to speak up, simply because very few bother or care to speak up. On that basis, it's not worth ever asking the community anything, ever. That includes the famous editor retention studies, or image filter 'referendum'. User:AlexandrDmitri _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l