Author: Mike Hearn 2012-07-09 18:30:14
Published on: 2012-07-09T18:30:14+00:00
The author of this piece argues against the removal of controversial content on a website. They assert that such an action would be influenced by internal politics and not from the perspective of the end-user, which could lead to the downfall of any product. Examples of products that have been affected by internal politics include plug-n-play hardware on Linux and Microsoft's inability to produce anything outside of Windows. The author believes that all information about a system should be available on its website, including controversial topics. They argue that it makes no sense to split the information between the main site and a less reliable wiki. The author goes on to state their opposition to random changes being made to the website without proper channels. They propose that instead, one person with a strong focus on regular people and their needs should be chosen as the sole committer to the website. This way, disputes can be resolved more effectively by having that one person make the final decision, rather than engaging in edit wars. Overall, the author advocates for a more user-focused approach to website management and decision-making processes that are not influenced by internal politics.
Updated on: 2023-06-06T06:12:08.368436+00:00