User:Dronebogus/Why don't you go work on the encyclopedia instead?

A familiar refrain at any ANI discussion that has gone on sufficiently long is that one or more parties should be busy building the encyclopedia rather than engaging in “drama”. This is obviously both invalid and a sign the accuser has run out of patience and good arguments. Every productive user, from WikiGnomes to Bureaucrats, wants to work on the encyclopedia in some way, shape, or form; if they have had to resort to ANI they clearly have run into an insurmountable dispute with other users that prevents them for effectively doing so.

The “why don’t you do something productive” non-argument is an obnoxious truism that does not speed up the process; in fact it actually does the opposite, keeping tempers high, respect low, and generally bogging down the thread with useless commentary.

Another, equally ill-advised place this phrase crops up is Articles for Deletion, from people who don’t understand or care that deletion is an important part of maintaining quality control on the encyclopedia.

With all that said, not every use of the term is illegitimate, even with otherwise productive users. For example, excessive pestering about userspace content does little to help the encyclopedia, even by proxy, and just wastes contributor time while sowing discord; it should only be reserved for egregious violations. And of course even some mostly productive users can stir up drama unnecessarily. However, it is still inadvisable to actually use the phrase “why don’t you go build the encyclopedia” or variations, for the same reason reason terms like “cruft” and “cheers” are discouraged: they’re glib cliches that add nothing to productive debate.