--- On Thu, 2/5/09, George Herbert wrote:
> From: George Herbert
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews
> [en]
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Thursday, February 5, 2009, 3:56 PM
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2
I remember one time the arbitration committee sanctioned an editor who
referred to another as an imbecile and then tried to justify it on the
basis that the other editor was obviously stupid. We've come a long way
from there. Now people rise to power and maintain it on the basis of
their nastyness.
Perhaps it would help if we disallowed certain words in block summaries?
- Asshole
- Fuck
- Idiot...
I'm no fan of censorship, but there's no reason these words should be
in block summaries at all as far as I can think of.
skype: node.ue
2009/2/5 Marc Riddell :
> When will you people finally
Andrew Whitworth wrote:
> If a project so large in size and scope as English Wikipedia is having
> these problems with hostility and incivility, you're maybe seeing a
> manifestation of problems in human nature itself. See [[w:Dunbar's
> Number]] for more information about large groups like this. I
> George Herbert wrote:
>> Civility, or more properly abusive editors, is not a petty problem. If I
>> had Jimbo's God-Emperor powers several existing WP users would be walked out
>> the door and invited to not come back, on the grounds that they are
>> persistently abusive and disruptive to oth
George Herbert wrote:
> Civility, or more properly abusive editors, is not a petty problem. If I
> had Jimbo's God-Emperor powers several existing WP users would be walked out
> the door and invited to not come back, on the grounds that they are
> persistently abusive and disruptive to other user
2009/2/5 George Herbert :
> Civility, or more properly abusive editors, is not a petty problem. If I
> had Jimbo's God-Emperor powers several existing WP users would be walked out
> the door and invited to not come back, on the grounds that they are
> persistently abusive and disruptive to other
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Michael Snow wrote:
>
>> Marc Riddell wrote:
>>
>>> It is clear that the Wikinews Project HAS come up with a successful model.
>>> The question is: are the other Projects even listening?
>>>
>> What are you suggesting is the successful model Wikinews has come
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> George Herbert wrote:
> > That it will probably take that long is unfortunate, but large online
> > communities become very unwieldy in some ways. Having realism about the
> > community dynamics is a necessary step in engaging in them as an
>> Marc Riddell wrote:
>>> It is clear that the Wikinews Project HAS come up with a successful model.
>>> The question is: are the other Projects even listening?
Michael Snow wrote:
>> What are you suggesting is the successful model Wikinews has come up
>> with? I thought you were citing Wikine
George Herbert wrote:
> That it will probably take that long is unfortunate, but large online
> communities become very unwieldy in some ways. Having realism about the
> community dynamics is a necessary step in engaging in them as an agent of
> change.
>
The model for this kind of community h
Marc Riddell wrote:
> on 2/5/09 10:45 AM, Andrew Whitworth at wknight8...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> The foundation is not likely to be able to do anything, even if it is
>> willing (which I doubt). It makes some sense to treat them as the
>> authority figure of last resort, but that isn't reality.
>
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
> You can see the results we've had: viz, not a lot. It's not like we
> can put our foot down and say "play nice, now, guys" and things get
> better. If we could solve this problem easily, we'd have done it years
> ago.
To be fair - we're playi
Philippe|Wiki wrote:
> Marc, without denying or confirming there are problems with discourse
> at Wikinews (because I have no personal knowledge), I would posit that
> your messages about this topic to this list have been a little...
> terse. Cary was proposing some perfectly valid thoughts
2009/2/5 Marc Riddell :
> I have been trying for over two years to bring this issue to the serious
> attention of the "powers that be" in the English Wikipedia. My messages are
> met either with a "there he goes again" attitude, or are not acknowledged at
> all. Where does one go from there if not
Michael Snow wrote:
> Marc Riddell wrote:
>
>> It is clear that the Wikinews Project HAS come up with a successful model.
>> The question is: are the other Projects even listening?
>>
> What are you suggesting is the successful model Wikinews has come up
> with? I thought you were citing W
2009/2/5 Marc Riddell :
> When will you people finally acknowledge that there is something terribly
> wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the Projects?
Marc, this may be a surprise to you, but you're not a lone voice in
the wilderness. Everyone with experience knows that m
Marc Riddell wrote:
> It is clear that the Wikinews Project HAS come up with a successful model.
> The question is: are the other Projects even listening?
>
What are you suggesting is the successful model Wikinews has come up
with? I thought you were citing Wikinews as an example of the problem
Hello,
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Marc Riddell wrote:
>
> This is an issue for Erik to respond to (or not); not for you to make
> excuses for him.
> This is purely an excuse for your inaction.
> No, I am asking that people work and communicate civilly and constructively
> with one anot
Marc, without denying or confirming there are problems with discourse
at Wikinews (because I have no personal knowledge), I would posit that
your messages about this topic to this list have been a little...
terse. Cary was proposing some perfectly valid thoughts (and money
DOES have to do
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> I have been trying for over two years to bring this issue to the serious
> attention of the "powers that be" in the English Wikipedia. My messages are
> met either with a "there he goes again" attitude, or are not acknowledged
> at
> all. Where
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Marc Riddell wrote:
>> When will you people finally acknowledge that there is something terribly
>> wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the Projects?
>> And this trend is certainly not confined to Wikinews. Take a good
2009/2/5 Marc Riddell :
> And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with
> you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email.
You're right - I apologize. I'll send a response to your original mail
later today.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marc Riddell wrote:
> When will you people finally acknowledge that there is something terribly
> wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the Projects?
> And this trend is certainly not confined to Wikinews. Take a good,
objective
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> When will you people finally acknowledge that there is something terribly
> wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the Projects?
One does not know deteriorated discourse unless they've, you know,
lived in the projects.[1]
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Marc Riddell
> wrote:
>> I have been trying for over two years to bring this issue to the serious
>> attention of the "powers that be" in the English Wikipedia. My messages are
>> met either with a "there he goes again" attitude, or are not acknowledged at
>> al
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Marc Riddell
wrote:
> I have been trying for over two years to bring this issue to the serious
> attention of the "powers that be" in the English Wikipedia. My messages are
> met either with a "there he goes again" attitude, or are not acknowledged at
> all. Where
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Marc Riddell
> wrote:
>> When will you people finally acknowledge that there is something terribly
>> wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the Projects?
>> And this trend is certainly not confined to Wikinews. Take a good, objective
>> loo
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> When will you people finally acknowledge that there is something terribly
> wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the Projects?
> And this trend is certainly not confined to Wikinews. Take a good, objective
> look at some
When will you people finally acknowledge that there is something terribly
wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the Projects?
And this trend is certainly not confined to Wikinews. Take a good, objective
look at some of the dialogue occurring on the English Wikipedia. The
atmo
30 matches
Mail list logo
