From WikiVotingDiscussion

'''Theory'''

On Wiki, silence is used for both agreement and disagreement.  Silence as an active process is not very effective.  Silence as a passive process is. When people fail to comment due to lack of interest, or because they think the page says all it needs to say, silence works. When people fail to comment when they disagree, silence does not work.


'''Justification'''

Recently there have been many pages created with various WikiBadge''s'' proposed.  Previously, there were other conventions proposed such as DoubleColonMessage''s''.  In most cases, no comments were made on the pages beyond those of the original poster.  This silence was not taken as an indication that the idea was not accepted, and in fact the poster committed faux paus of at least two types:
	*Changing established pages to use these non-accepted conventions
	*Continued creation of un-needed WikiBadge''s''

'''Therefore'''

Actively respond to ideas that you perceive would harm Wiki as a communication medium.  Do not be afraid to gently educate those who are unknowingly harming Wiki.  If any such correction is faulty, I am sure the community will step in, so that innovation is not stifled.

SilenceAsCommunication should be understood more as agreement that the page is correct, not that the page is wrong.

'''Concerns'''

If the theory expressed above is correct, it would indicate that the Wiki community should be more active in voicing disagreement with new Wiki infrastructure, where appropriate.  This seems to run counter to the culture of Wiki.  I personally have resisted the urge to say ''no, no, we don't need that'', as I didn't want to step on some anyone's toes.  But, it seems that stepping on a few toes is worth it to keep the Wiki useful.

-- AnonymousDonor

----

This argument has proven false on Wiki.  See especially ArgumentFromSilence.

----
See also:  DeathOfThePage, WikiVotingDiscussion, ArgumentFromSilence
----
CategoryWiki