Also worth adding that if Everyking ever said something like "in the past I was mean to Phil and he didn't deserve what I did to him and I've learned not to treat people like that even if I disagree with them strongly," I suspect he would pass RFA or whatever it is he wants with extreme ease.
QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 25th November 2009, 9:10pm)
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Wed 25th November 2009, 1:56pm)
The 'community' has absolutely no interest in developing such a structure. The only way such a structure will ever be erected is if it (or at least its precursor) is put in place by fiat, and the only entities with the power to possibly pull that off are the Foundation, Jimmy Wales, and the ArbCom.
...at which point, the current somewhat-debatable trend towards a reduction in the number of active WP editors will probably become a stampede for the exits. That would be a good thing, of course, but the fact that the system is ungovernable (and therefore institutionally irresponsible) is one of its main attractions for most of the current community members.
Still, you have to wonder - if they did that, would the existing community slowly be replaced by people who understand the need for such things as editorial standards (beyond simplistic notions of "notability") and effective governance structures...? IMO probably not, but it would make the whole thing less objectionable.
One of the outcomes I can think of Somey is that of the wounded animal. If editors leave in droves, but because of pagerank, namebrand, etc, people keep using WP, then the BLP and POV situations will only worsen as WP descends into an Myspace-like existence, only with more dangerous credibility than Myspace could ever hope for.