Okay, this reveals my misconception of your comment, but here again I disagree for pretty much the same reason and with the same reply: aesthetic judgment is very important (as in: it’s an aspect of preference, and beware trivial inconveniences). It’s only something to discard if opinions differ so wildly as to make the negotiations worse than dropping the matter.
My comment was addressed only to what the community aesthetic is (was?), and not what it ought to be. I deliberately phrased the comment in the past tense to allow for a response like “well, maybe we should change that standard”.
The comment you linked to talks exactly about what the community behavior should be, one person’s opinion, or an observation about a different community’s aesthetics.
Okay, this reveals my misconception of your comment, but here again I disagree for pretty much the same reason and with the same reply: aesthetic judgment is very important (as in: it’s an aspect of preference, and beware trivial inconveniences). It’s only something to discard if opinions differ so wildly as to make the negotiations worse than dropping the matter.
My comment was addressed only to what the community aesthetic is (was?), and not what it ought to be. I deliberately phrased the comment in the past tense to allow for a response like “well, maybe we should change that standard”.
The comment you linked to talks exactly about what the community behavior should be, one person’s opinion, or an observation about a different community’s aesthetics.
I don’t see how a post written by a single author that didn’t reflect the actual practice or survey of opinion can serve that purpose.
But Johnicholas didn’t negotiate, but instead made claims about a consensus aesthetic. Cyan contradicted this false statement.