On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:16:48 +0900, "Stephen J. Turnbull" firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Steven D'Aprano writes:
As I see it, the two camps are divided purely on the question of how to get increased privileges.
As I see it, the division is over what constitutes merit, and how it is created or improved.
Both sides agree that merit is a requirement, but the disagreement is on how to prove you have such merit.
I disagree vehemently with that characterization of my position (and I strongly suspect David would, too). The primary argument of the "quality" camp as I see it is that the familiarization period *creates* value, both in terms of training ("merit" for the job) and interpersonal relationships ("building community"). Thus it is a *net benefit*, not a *net cost*. AFAICS, the "quantity" camp sees it as a nearly pure loss, simply slowing down inflow of preexisting "merit" (and perhaps discouraging it entirely).
Except for the "vehemently" part, I think that's an accurate summary of my position.
-- R. David Murray www.bitdance.com