2009/6/27 stevertigo <[email protected]>: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]>wrote: >> 2009/6/27 stevertigo <[email protected]>: >>> You could start a thread called "if it ain't broke don't fix it" and >>> there >>> we can debate whether the axiom applies to anything other than >>> appliances. >> That's not an axiom, it is a consequence of the definitions of "broke" >> and "fix". > Hm. So you are saying that "definitions have consequences?"
Yes. A logical argument generally starts by defining some terms and stating a few axioms and following logical implications from those. > Speaking of definitions: You also previously used the term "problem:" Every > edit conflict is a "problem" and DR itself is almost the same as it was 5.7 > years ago. > You also used the term "current system:" It is my understanding that a > "convention" is not a "system." I'm guessing you don't mean "edit conflict" as in when two people edit the same page at the same time? You mean "edit *war*", yes? I don't see why an old system is necessarily a bad one and you haven't explained how your system would be better than the current one (which is far more than just conventions, we have very clear policy on DR). _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
