Wikipedia talk:Assume the assumption of assuming good faith

So, what?
Is there a conclusion? A.Z. 16:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I concur. --Charitwo talk 04:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The conclusion is in the "See Also" links. This is the sort of fluff that makes policies memorable. --Brilliand (talk) 21:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Heh
Lol, this is stupid but brilliant! Deamon138 (talk) 01:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I am definitely against the merger, which is mysteriously mentioned on the project page but not on this talk page (unless "So, what?" above is about the merger). A few extra layers of recursion are funny, and help drive the point home. This point should keep its own page. --Brilliand (talk) 21:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Yea, but if someone still decides that it should be deleted or merge (I guess that would be reasonable), please don't do that, just remove it from policies and add it to humor category. I laughed to tears when I read it. Tiredtime (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

This has gone a long time without any meaningful changes... I've taken the liberty of removing the merger proposal notice. --Brilliand (talk) 05:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Not ad infinitum
In the example of


 * Hey stop trolling
 * Hey WP:AGF
 * Hey WP:AAGF

I don't believe this can go on with another "Hey WP:AAAGF" because that would contradict the initial "Hey WP:AGF". By saying "Hey WP:AGF" you are not assuming that they are assuming good faith, therefore it's illogical to tell them to "assume that you are assuming that they are assuming good faith." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.143.6.73 (talk) 07:18, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Assume the assumption of the assumption of assuming good faith.
We need it — Preceding unsigned comment added by TerribleTy2727 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC)