QUOTE(written by he who wrote it @ Fri 8th May 2009, 1:52pm)
QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Fri 8th May 2009, 3:08pm)
SlimVirgin has emerged from the shadows to offer a
new enforcement approach, which would consist of a sort of "NPOV committee." The proposal is being well received, although I can imagine that it might create new avenues of Cabalism.
That is not difficult. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) In fact it would be hard to imagine how such a committee would not become simply another battleground between the factions, with both sides scheming to get their allies in and their opponents out.
On the other hand, it's a good mechanism to get the recursive ironies of this stupid NPOV idea out in the open. Finally, we'll have some NPOV committee toiling away to reach a group conscensus opinion (see POV) about what (or where) the NPOV officially
is on some subject. Somebody is bound to notice the meta-problem. They haven't yet, but I still hold out hopes that some of these people will "get it" (finally) when the stinker of a contradiction is held right in front of their noses and they are forced to take a good snort.
Oh, they'll try to be clever, like trying to pretend that figuring out factural NPOV policy is an ordinary meta-policy decission, like how many hyperlinks should ideally be in a sentence. The problem is, that that won't work, because this is NOT a meta-problem with wiki policy. This committee is going to have to deal with epistemology and factual contect about the real world-- the very thing that ArbCom has (probably wisely) stayed away from, until now, like it was a hot potato. Which it is.
(IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif) I expect hilarity if they do it.