I don't Daylog but I'm Daylogging. To americanise, this sucks. Some might know I've been feeling uneasy about some of the editorial nukes being bandied about. I've certainly had many nodes nuked, most justifiably.
I've had an entire experiment nuked from orbit, after some editor didn't get it.
I've had a set of quite neat-o nodes about 163 nuked; nobody in their right mind would want to read 163, but exp(sqrt(pi*163)), and various subexpressions, might pull someone in. So fewer people will know about a fairly amazing property of this number. Big deal. Editors don't have to like the ways I try to advertise neat facts, and they're called "editors" for a reason.
Some of my writeups (cough... windows error message haiku... cough) were meant to get nuked... along with the annoyance which had prompted them. I never did write enough Magic: The Gathering writeups to get rid of another annoyance, though; if you'd like to start, note that ``Everything needs facts. / Not Magic: The Gathering! / Wisdom not on cards.'' slashes added in accordance with E2's Irony Free Zone ordinances.
Now we've reached the next stage: Editors nuking what they do not understand. Case in point (and yes, this is what prompted this rant): What the hell is an assault monkey?
For all the monkey node control advocates throw around, they still haven't explained to me exactly what an "assault monkey" is. Is it some fictional type of marmoset that is specially meant for assaulting people? Or is it lemurs that are deadlier than others? Do they spit soy out faster than others? Or what?
It might seem a bit less weird if you examine the top-second softlink on that node: what the hell is an assault weapon?. Almost any user who's been here for a while will know about DMan rants; a few times I actually took him seriously enough to make fun of him (and to be made fun of, you have to be taken seriously, or it's not funny).
E2 still has its monkey node problem (although it is getting better). And it certainly has its share of monkey node control advocates, as well as members of the NMA (Noder's Monkey Association). Still, the debate is perhaps a bit less weighty than the debate over the right of a few psychopathic whackos^W^W^W^Wthe people to bear arms. Maybe a chance to translate arguments over, and separate logic from passion?
Evidently not. On E2 you can be serious. It really helps if you're serious about your teen angst, but noding lyrics for all songs of the 75 most important bands of the third quarter of 1987 will also do. Or you could even do something technical. Just remember to pretend you're writing for illiterate idiots who have no ability to comprehend irony.
Forget about using irony to make your point. E2 is an irony free zone. Somebody might not get your point!
When I don't get a writeup's point, I downvote it. I don't mind if people do the same to my writeups: a vote is an expression of personal opinion. I might think nasty things about their reading habits, just like they might think nasty things about my writing habits. I can wish that they looked into the context, but I cannot demand it. This is good.
When some editors don't get a writeup's point, they nuke it. I do mind when people do that. Nuking is not an expression of personal opinion, it is an expression of editorial control over what we'd like to see in the database. So I can demand that they look into the context.
I still think my writeup was a good, honest expression of two points of view on two debates. And I'm very sure I have to take a long, hard look at what I want to achieve on E2 today, and whether I can do that.