2012-03-27 15:13:26 I undid your edits at CalPIRG because you removed differing points of view. That's not "remov[ing] outdated content" or "edit[ing] relevant information". In the future, please respect the contributions of others on the wiki. —WilliamLewis
2012-03-27 15:26:50 My apologies. I found that a lot of those criticisms were from several years back, and thought it would be alright to remove irrelevant ones. I'll leave them as is. However, will I be allowed to remove the outdated information about previous years' coordinators and the like? That stuff's pretty irrelevant now, and the space could be used better. —MichelleHoang
2012-03-27 15:36:11 Michelle-let's find a way to keep the old coordinator's info for posterity please. —PeterBoulay
2012-03-27 15:39:56 Alright, thank you! I'll think about what I want to write a little more before editing the page, then. —MichelleHoang
2012-03-27 15:49:53 One option might be to toss in a new section like "Past Officers", move the outdated info down there, and add the up-to-date info.
Also, if there have been changes in policy that make it so old complaints should no longer apply, it'd be fine to note that. For example, "In the past (optional: provide dates) there was criticism about X. Taking those complaints into account, CalPIRG did Y in hopes of avoiding similar problems in the future."
The main concern here is preserving history. Sometimes history includes problems. That doesn't mean it can't be made clear that those problems no longer exist (if that's actually the case); they just shouldn't be deleted outright. When a business or organization is responsive to criticism, it can actually be really good. For example, I wrote about a problem with some fries sitting in at least 1/4 cup of oil at Uncle Vito's a while back. Another editor got word to the manager that day and he said he'd take steps to ensure it wouldn't happen again. It was really gratifying. —TomGarberson
2012-03-27 17:45:02 Hey, no worries... it's a back and forth editing process, just like everything done with many people involved. I note that you removed the bit about people being able to opt-out by going to the office. Can people no longer opt-out of CalPRIG? —Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards