| Revision as of 20:43, 30 March 2009 editSillyfolkboy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors141,032 edits more of the same...← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:25, 3 April 2009 edit undoSapphic (talk | contribs)6,851 editsm →Could use your endorsement: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Hi Locke. I'd really appreciate more of your thoughts . Cheers! ] (]) 20:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC) | Hi Locke. I'd really appreciate more of your thoughts . Cheers! ] (]) 20:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == Could use your endorsement == | |||
| I just a compromise on the date autoformatting issue. I think we could get an acceptable replacement system (Bill said he'd still help with that) if there weren't people constantly trying to derail the process. And I think those people would stop trying to derail the process if we let them just go ahead and delink everything (or delink the less "relevant" links, however they want to decide that, I've never really cared about that part of the argument.) As one of the other really vocal supporters of a software solution, I think the opponents will buy into its viability more (since it's giving them what they want, at least in the short term and potentially forever, if it ends up being what the community ultimately decides) if you also give it your support. Or if you don't want to support it, I'd like to have a chance to convince you :) --] (]) 02:25, 3 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:25, 3 April 2009
Hi Locke. I'd really appreciate more of your thoughts here. Cheers! Sillyfolkboy (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Could use your endorsement
I just proposed a compromise on the date autoformatting issue. I think we could get an acceptable replacement system (Bill said he'd still help with that) if there weren't people constantly trying to derail the process. And I think those people would stop trying to derail the process if we let them just go ahead and delink everything (or delink the less "relevant" links, however they want to decide that, I've never really cared about that part of the argument.) As one of the other really vocal supporters of a software solution, I think the opponents will buy into its viability more (since it's giving them what they want, at least in the short term and potentially forever, if it ends up being what the community ultimately decides) if you also give it your support. Or if you don't want to support it, I'd like to have a chance to convince you :) --Sapphic (talk) 02:25, 3 April 2009 (UTC)