User blog comment:Triakula/Proposal of softening citation policy on GWiki/@comment-35470197-20200115122614/@comment-39541634-20200117112819

"Right. I am not saying that we should decide everything by voting. It is better to make several helpful rules to keep the main space sound."

Then we agree on that, at least.

"I think that it is not so easy to satisfy all of the four conditions using multiple accounts, but you do not think so, right?"

Indeed.

I mean, I agree that under normal circumstances it would very difficult to satisfy all of the four conditions using multiple accounts.

Trouble is, the situation here is not normal. "The point is that my proposal is just about the voting for whether we create a new article on a given notion or not, but not for the content."

I understand that.

And I still stand by my statement that people who aren't well-versed in googology should not be the ones who vote on the inclusion of a new googological work.

So far you haven't addressed that specific point at all. "> And how are the admins supposed to decide what's inappropriate?If you doubt it, then how other members in the panel can decide what is inappropriate?"

Of-course we'll need some guidelines by which the members of the panel would make their decision.

And yes, I suppose the admins could function in this role as well, but I don't see any compelling reason to decide - a priori - that "admins" and "panel members" should be the exact same people. This should be one of the things we discuss, before seriously considering my proposal. "Well, I personally accept such a number [Blirx], because it is nothing wrong."I don't understand.

On the one hand, you're suggesting a voting system that will screen potential mainspace entries. You also seem to think that such a system is important enough for us to have certain safeguards in place, to prevent its abuse.

On the second hand, you're saying that we should accept pretty much anything, to the point of accepting random numbers that appear on some random website.

So my question is: If we follow the second philosophy, what's the point of a voting system? Why have a screening process at all, if that's our stance?

"For many googologists, naming a number (including salads) is a significant portion of googology, I guess."

I realize that.

But if a person does nothing more than giving random names to random numbers, without any rhyme or reason, is he really doing googology? When I typed that "Blirx" example (which was completely random) was I doing googology?

I don't think so.

Randomly banging on a piano does not mean that you are making music. Randomly splashing colors on a canvas does not mean that your are doing art. And giving random names to random numbers does not mean that you are doing googology.