>> Wiki is good for long-term ongoing discussions if you can think slowly enough to keep up with the speed of the discussion.

What do you mean by "think slowly"? The wiki isn't about discussion (usually), it's about distilled peer-reviewed information.


>> Here, you may have 100 messages in a day on an interesting topic. Where the wiki shines in discussions, I believe, is in refactoring and distilling the discussion into a more concise representation of the topic when the discussion finally trails off, or even as it is still in progress.

Precisely. Who has time to read 100 messages? Moreover the SQL messages here recently are 95% noise. Wouldn't a list of pros and cons work much better? Anyone looking for local vs remote view wisdom here has a mountain of garbage to sift.

Anyway, it was just a suggestion. Anything's got to be better than reliving threads when what you are looking for is a definitive, peer-reviewed list of pros and cons to make your decisions by.