Talk:Guidelines

Please improve this

I think this is a pretty good starting point and should help people know where to aim. I'm wodering if it's really necessary to bar non-cappers from editing here. I can think of a few cases where a non-capper might make useful contribs (A longtime lurker might remember some detail on a thread, a real world friend of a capper might have some legit info to add, an obsessive proof reader might wander in here from a search engine and correct our spelling/grammar) and none where they'd come in and make unwanted changes that didn't violate some other rule. Perhaps just require registration for edits?

--GersonK 05:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with friends of cappers or even lurkers of capping come in and edit the wiki. What I don't want are people who don't have anything to do with capping coming in and making changes. I have no doubt that that is going to happen. People surfing in off of a Google search, that sort of thing. I would like to curtail that (casual surfers editing the wiki) as much as possible. This place is for cappers, by cappers. And I think we can police our own grammar and spelling. Believe me, I'm extremely anal about it and you don't know how hard it is for me not to go up to your comments and change 'wodering' to 'wondering'. When it comes to info in the wiki, I'll make sure we're up to code.

If you or anyone else doesn't agree with me, that's totally cool. I'm open to discussion about it or anything else. It's all on the table. I'm determined that this place will be run as a community. Just shy of mob rules. ;)

Arch 14:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd say that registration for edits is a good idea. It's far far to easy to make an alteration or whatnot to screw with someone's listing. Of course, once the core group of administrators gets cemented, and are able to check back often (though, we can be realistic and understand we're not going to get countless changes per minute like regular Wiki-listings do), that shouldn't be a problem. It should be firm in the guidelines, though, that is someone steps over the line in a negative way, they're off period. It might be easily changed, but you don't want someone who doesn't like capper 'vanillapepsi' coming in, and changing their entry to say "VANILAPEPSISUXXXXX!" It might be easily returned to normal, but any negative-alterations along those lines should be prohibited.

GlitterRock 15:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

So, you accept at least one of my cases where a non-capper might make valuable contributions that fall within our other rules. What I'd like to hear is an example of a non-capper coming in and making an undesirable change that isn't barred by the rules? Or in short - what could somebody do here that would be bad only if they weren't a capper? It just seems like pointless elitisim, especially with the barrier to entry on being a capper so low. Which maybe means there's not much point in my arguin the point.

(I'd think glitter's vanillapepsi case might already be covered under 5 and 9, and wouldn't be any moe acceptible if it had been done by somebody who'd made a few score of caps. P.S. I'm not so much worried about preventing bad changes from ever happening - as glitter points out, we can always revert. I'm concerned about defining bad changes before they happen, so we can say why we reverted them.) --GersonK 17:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)