[Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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 atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day. And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would you have done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in silence? That, alone, speaks volumes. Marc Riddell -- From: bawolff bawolff...@gmail.com Reply-To: bawolff...@gmail.com, Wikinews mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 22:34:14 -0700 To: Wikinews mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant [I happened to stumble upon what appears to be an aftermath of an edit war, and am quite disgusted by it. The following is basically a rant about it, as I'm not really sure how best to bring it up] I've recently noticed a marked increased in incivility between contributors on Wikinews. I find this really disturbing as it is often between admins who one would think know better. For example (And I'm not trying to pick on anyone, these are just some random ones i came across): *But no, you've gotta be an asshole just like always *A small amount of brain activity would lead to the presumption that someone in my position knows what they're doing *I suggest you get the fuck off your high horse or get the fuck out of dodge *they are _MY_ comment sections and _I_ can write what ever the hell _I_ want. Now, I know I am taking these out of context, but to be blunt I don't care if the context was responding to poop vandalism - It is incredibly inappropriate for admins to say these things under any circumstances. If these were new users making these comments, they would have been blocked in the neighborhood of 2 weeks to a year, maybe even indefinitely. How can we really expect to recruit and retain new contributors, when this is how the long time contributors are treated? -Bawolff ___ Wikinews-l mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net 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 of the dialogue occurring on the English Wikipedia. The atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day. Not all projects. I'd like to take this opportunity to shamelessly plug Wikibooks, which is as close to utopia as we get here in wiki world. We don't fight, there's very little hostility, and a relatively small number of hardworking users are producing a pretty impressive group of free textbooks. /shameless plug. Projects are self-administering. If you feel the projects are not functioning properly it is the fault of the project, not the fault of the foundation. Get your admins to block your trouble users, and if the admins themselves are causing trouble then petition to have them removed. Everybody wants the WMF hand of god to swing down from the sky and deliver relief to various community problems. It won't happen and it can't possibly work anyway. Change and solutions have to come from within, or they won't come at all. And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would you have done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in silence? That, alone, speaks volumes. And what response do you want from him? This isn't his problem to solve. --Andrew Whitworth ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net 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 of the dialogue occurring on the English Wikipedia. The atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day. on 2/5/09 9:40 AM, Andrew Whitworth at wknight8...@gmail.com wrote: Not all projects. I'd like to take this opportunity to shamelessly plug Wikibooks, which is as close to utopia as we get here in wiki world. We don't fight, there's very little hostility, and a relatively small number of hardworking users are producing a pretty impressive group of free textbooks. /shameless plug. There should be no shame in pride of one's work, Andrew ;-). I do congratulate you and your editors in maintaining a workspace that is both open and civil. Projects are self-administering. If you feel the projects are not functioning properly it is the fault of the project, not the fault of the foundation. Get your admins to block your trouble users, and if the admins themselves are causing trouble then petition to have them removed. Everybody wants the WMF hand of god to swing down from the sky and deliver relief to various community problems. It won't happen and it can't possibly work anyway. Change and solutions have to come from within, or they won't come at all. 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 the Foundation itself? And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would you have done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in silence? That, alone, speaks volumes. And what response do you want from him? This isn't his problem to solve. In a professional setting I would expect an acknowledgement that the email was at least received. Marc ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net 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 does one go from there if not the Foundation itself? 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. 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:Dubar's Number]] for more information about large groups like this. If you can't fix the problem from within English Wikipedia, then the problems are likely to be unfixable. --Andrew Whitworth ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net 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 does one go from there if not the Foundation itself? 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. A sad state of affairs. 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:Dubar's Number]] for more information about large groups like this. If you can't fix the problem from within English Wikipedia, then the problems are likely to be unfixable. Andrew, it is not the size of the group that is the issue, but how that group is managed. And there is a huge cultural difference between control and management. It all rests with the skillful leadership of that group. It is my professional business to know such things. Marc ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] It.wiki wins the Premiolino!!
Frieda Brioschi wrote: Premiolino (which means little award) is the ancient and most important italian journalistic award. it.wiki wins in the category New media for this reason: (because) it's a great, open, accessible for everyone, democratic encyclopedia, always updated in real time (e.g. the article Giorgio Napolitano improved by his staff), very useful for every writer. The award consists in a parchment and a 5000€ cheque. Felicitazioni alla Wikipedia in italiano! --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net 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 9:45 AM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8...@gmail.com 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:Dubar's Number]] for more information about large groups like this. If you can't fix the problem from within English Wikipedia, then the problems are likely to be unfixable. Interesting article. I just realized my Bacon number is higher than my Dunbar number, thanks Andrew. On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net wrote: Andrew, it is not the size of the group that is the issue, but how that group is managed. And there is a huge cultural difference between control and management. It all rests with the skillful leadership of that group. It is my professional business to know such things. Yes, management implies that those subjected to it enjoy some degree of freedom, so that it still seems fun for them. Treading lightly in this regard is crucial. Or in the business world, assuming a supervisory position most often imply a departure from actual work. Even one's de jure duty of supervising can easily be delegated to a lower person: Go supervise these people. ... B-but you're the boss here, not me. ... Yes, I am your boss. Now: go supervise these people. ... So I'm their boss now? ... Yup. Conversations like this usually mark the birth of a workplace Ponzi scheme. I've been in scenarios like this much of my adult life. —C.W. [1] the t is silent. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
-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 look at some of the dialogue occurring on the English Wikipedia. The atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day. And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would you have done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in silence? That, alone, speaks volumes. First of all, Erik may or may not have received your email, and the reasons he did or did not respond to you can be immense and varied. You should not make assumptions based on a lack of communication by anyone, staff or community member. Secondly, what gives you the impression that Foundation staff are able to sweep in and make everyone behave; or furthermore, why should you not assume that we've not already tried some way to encourage conviviality and discourage attacks. I have personally found myself in the predicament of trying to solve issues for people and getting my head bitten off by the very people I was trying to help! At least one of those individuals resorted to calling me denigrating names on lists cc'd to numerous folks, including coworkers, Jimmy Wales, and my boss; and his fellow complainants did nothing to object. The Foundation, as successful as the last fundraiser went, remains to having limited resources. Our volunteering model is next to impossible to define, given the enormity of our community. Discussions take place on IRC about the simple idea of removing admin access to anyone who uses ugly or rude block messages. This idea is met with huge opposition; by solid contributors. You're asking people to stop acting like people. Perhaps we should follow the Wikinews discussion more closely...even participate in it, rather than expanding it to include all of the Foundation projects in one fell swoop. Given that the community is much smaller there, a solution might take place that will result in people being more proactive about reducing ugliness and being kinder to one another and promoting an assumption of good faith. Maybe Wikinews can even come up with a model that can be adopted by other projects. Cary Bass Volunteer Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJizBfyQg4JSymDYkRAt5IAKCKf41wFBKeOZg19zjZsFqLWSLrXACggzlb at4bw0uJgrFWEMPryewIs8Y= =K5tT -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Delete moldovan Wikipedia
I read the text of the petition, here: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/moldovanwikipedia/ Parts of it are very humorous. It would be absurd to have a Wikipedia in English of French with Arabic or Cyrillic letters. It is as absurd to have a Moldovan Wikipedia with a Cyrillic script. Well, sure, it would be... but is there a part of the world where people actually write English or French in Arabic or Cyrillic, the way Cyrillic is used for Moldovan on the left bank of the Dniester*? If you can show me one, I'll happily support Wikipedias for them. You would probably intervene if somebody would start re-writing the English Wikipedia in Arabic letters, and you would probably not allow that. Well, if somebody tried to start such a project within Wikimedia, it would probably be rejected... but then, there's no case for writing English in Arabic. Historically, it's not been done, and it isn't done that way by any native speaker today. On the other hand, Moldovan was written in Cyrillic in ALL of Moldova until 1989, and today it is still used on the left bank of the Dniester and (perhaps) in some Moldovan expatriot communities in the former Soviet Union. What SCHOOL teaches children English-speaking children to write their own language using Arabic letters, the way that most Moldavian-language schools teach Moldavian children to use Cyrillic in that territory? I realize this is an emotional issue for you, but please don't distort facts. If your argument is really reasonable, you should be able to make it without resorting to invalid analogies. --- * The politically neutral name for what is sometimes referred to as Transnistria or the PMR. skype: node.ue 2009/2/5 Cetateanu Moldovanu cetatean...@gmail.com: 1. Wikipedia has a pretended version of it in Moldovan language using the Cyrillic script 2. The state language is Moldovan (identical to Romanian), and it is written in the Latin alphabet, not Cyrillic 3. we request you to delete the fake Moldovan version in Cyrillic from Wikipedia We have 2,212 people on facebook who signed the petition. http://apps.facebook.com/causes/39775 Or at least rename it to mo-cyrillic.wikipedia ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Delete moldovan Wikipedia
How many times have you sent this request to this list now? skype: node.ue 2009/2/5 Cetateanu Moldovanu cetatean...@gmail.com: 1. Wikipedia has a pretended version of it in Moldovan language using the Cyrillic script 2. The state language is Moldovan (identical to Romanian), and it is written in the Latin alphabet, not Cyrillic 3. we request you to delete the fake Moldovan version in Cyrillic from Wikipedia We have 2,212 people on facebook who signed the petition. http://apps.facebook.com/causes/39775 Or at least rename it to mo-cyrillic.wikipedia ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Delete moldovan Wikipedia
2009/2/5 Cetateanu Moldovanu cetatean...@gmail.com: 1. Wikipedia has a pretended version of it in Moldovan language using the Cyrillic script 2. The state language is Moldovan (identical to Romanian), and it is written in the Latin alphabet, not Cyrillic 3. we request you to delete the fake Moldovan version in Cyrillic from Wikipedia We have 2,212 people on facebook who signed the petition. http://apps.facebook.com/causes/39775 Or at least rename it to mo-cyrillic.wikipedia This matter has been discussed on this list, and others, numerous times. All the issues are known, there is no point going over it all again. I can't remember the outcome of the last discussion, but if the wiki is going to be renamed, it will happen with or without you bringing it up again and again. Petitions certainly won't help - you haven't even given a number of people that think it should stay where it is, so how can we possibly know if 2,212 is a significant number? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] UNESCO discussion on Access to OER
Dear all, First post to list - hello to all. I am particularly interested in access / digital divide issues regarding online media and Open Educational Resources, particularly with regard to technical issues, such as poor bandwidth or mobile accessibility. I am not sure what discussion there has been on this list regarding digital divide issues around mediawiki / wikipedia, and I am sure there are quite a few ideas around how to improve (low bandwidth) access. I thought you might be interested in an upcoming mailinglist-based discussion around digital divide / access issues for OER (on the mailing list of UNESCO's international Community on Open Educational Resources), and I would like to invite you all to participate (if interested). The discussion starts this coming Monday (9th Feb), and to participate you simply subscribe to the mailing list: https://communities.unesco.org/wws/info/iiep-oer-opencontent Further details below and on http://oerwiki.iiep-unesco.org . Feel free to email me if you have any questions. I hope this is of interest - apologies if this list isn't quite the right forum. All the best, Bjoern UNESCO launches new discussion on Open Educational Resources (OER): access to Open Educational Resources, 9-27 February 2009 The UNESCO Open Educational Resources Community is launching a new three-week discussion on the subject of access issues. The discussion will take place from 9 to 27 February 2009 and is open to all. During the first week the community will focus on identifying - and attempting to classify - the main problems in accessing OER. The theme of the second and third weeks will be tried and tested solutions, as participants are invited to share their experiences in working around such problems. The discussion will be facilitated by Bjoern Hassler of Cambridge University’s Centre for Applied Research in Educational Technologies. About the community: UNESCO’s international Community on Open Educational Resources has been active since 2005. It connects over 700 individuals in 105 countries to share information and discuss issues surrounding the production and use of Open Educational Resources – web- based materials offered freely and openly for use and reuse in teaching, learning and research. UNESCO’s work on Open Educational Resources is generously supported by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Participate in the discussion: • For more information, see the Access2OER page on the UNESCO OER Community wiki http://oerwiki.iiep-unesco.org/index.php?title=Access2OER • Subscribe to the mailing list here: https://communities.unesco.org/wws/info/iiep-oer-opencontent ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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 with this problem... who do you think pays the Foundation people that you want to swoop in from on high? They don't work for beads, you know...) and you acted fairly aggressively towards him. Slow down, take a deep breath, and think about detailing the issues specifically, rather than some broad sweeping statement. Then, we as a list can start to think through what we - the volunteers who make up this particular list - can offer in the way of help (if anything). I know you're frustrated. I bet I would be too. I'm just suggesting that maybe there's another way to handle this... __ Philippe|Wiki philippe.w...@gmail.com [[en:User:Philippe]] On Feb 5, 2009, at 1:12 PM, Marc Riddell wrote: -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 look at some of the dialogue occurring on the English Wikipedia. The atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day. And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would you have done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in silence? That, alone, speaks volumes. on 2/5/09 1:30 PM, Cary Bass at c...@wikimedia.org wrote: First of all, Erik may or may not have received your email, and the reasons he did or did not respond to you can be immense and varied. You should not make assumptions based on a lack of communication by anyone, staff or community member. This is an issue for Erik to respond to (or not); not for you to make excuses for him. Secondly, what gives you the impression that Foundation staff are able to sweep in and make everyone behave; or furthermore, why should you not assume that we've not already tried some way to encourage conviviality and discourage attacks. Where? When? I have personally found myself in the predicament of trying to solve issues for people and getting my head bitten off by the very people I was trying to help! This is not about solving specific issues for people; it is about teaching them how to civilly and constructively solve their own. Learn the difference. At least one of those individuals resorted to calling me denigrating names on lists cc'd to numerous folks, including coworkers, Jimmy Wales, and my boss; and his fellow complainants did nothing to object. The Foundation, as successful as the last fundraiser went, remains to having limited resources. Oh, please, Cary, money has nothing to do with what I am talking about, and you should know it. Our volunteering model is next to impossible to define, given the enormity of our community. This is purely an excuse for your inaction. Discussions take place on IRC about the simple idea of removing admin access to anyone who uses ugly or rude block messages. This idea is met with huge opposition; by solid contributors. Solid (whatever that is) contributors are objecting to ruling out ugly or rude messages!?! Time for a new definition of solidity. You're asking people to stop acting like people. No, I am asking that people work and communicate civilly and constructively with one another so that important matters can be resolved. Perhaps we should follow the Wikinews discussion more closely...even participate in it, rather than expanding it to include all of the Foundation projects in one fell swoop. Given that the community is much smaller there, a solution might take place that will result in people being more proactive about reducing ugliness and being kinder to one another and promoting an assumption of good faith. Maybe Wikinews can even come up with a model that can be adopted by other projects. It is clear that the Wikinews Project HAS come up with a successful model. The question is: are the other Projects even listening? Marc Riddell ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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, rather than the solution. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Delete moldovan Wikipedia
If that were the only purpose of his message, that'd be one thing, but he's asking us to delete it, and then at the end of the message only says Or at least... do what was said would be done. Mark skype: node.ue 2009/2/5 geni geni...@gmail.com: 2009/2/5 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com: How many times have you sent this request to this list now? Quite a few but since we have agreed that switching to mo-cy is the right thing to do prodding us once a month to try and get the change done is a not unreasonable approach. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Delete moldovan Wikipedia
Certainly mo-Cyrl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_15924 (or, preforrably ro-Cyrl, as the mo code is obsolete); Moldovan/Romanian is to my knowledge not in any mentionable extent spoken in Cyprushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1 . 2009/2/5 geni geni...@gmail.com 2009/2/5 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com: How many times have you sent this request to this list now? Quite a few but since we have agreed that switching to mo-cy is the right thing to do prodding us once a month to try and get the change done is a not unreasonable approach. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- Jon Harald Søby http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
2009/2/5 Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net: 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 the Foundation itself? If you mean posting to wikien-l about it, the people there have suggested that you have to take it to the wiki. You demurred from this. The Arbitration Committee might be a point of approach. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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 (and money DOES have to do with this problem... who do you think pays the Foundation people that you want to swoop in from on high? They don't work for beads, you know...) and you acted fairly aggressively towards him. I don't think that it's a problem that can easily be solved by throwing money at it. The Securities and Exchange Commission likely had more than enough money to do its job, and the likes of Madoff still managed to get around it. Maybe if we could get all the problem makers and problem solvers together, and locked them in together until they fixed things the results would be interesting. That would cost a lot for travel and accommodations, but I'm not prepared to show great optimism that such a solution will come about. Ec ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.ukwrote: 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 playing really nice with offenders, rather than playing nasty hardball. We could politely play nasty hardball, and squash a few people under our polite polished jackboots of propriety. It wouldn't necessarily be a self-contradiction to use excessive force to try and impose politeness. That said, the ultimate problem is community interaction issues that incivility and abuse cause, and abusive admin responses make *that* worse even if we help the incivility problem, so it's probably not a wise approach. That said, making more of the civility blocks stick would be helpful. The sense of the community that some of the problematic contributors are more worth having than asking to leave is probably a mistake. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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. A sad state of affairs. Yes, it is. Nevertheless it is a fundamental paradox in this kind of project. We grow up with an old authoritarian paradigm where people are taught to take orders, and even expect to be told what to do and how to do it. In the new paradigm of sharing we expect people to take responsibility for what they say and do, and to use common sense in their approach to problems. A co-operative or consensual model is difficult when worth has been defined in term of the rights (or rites) of winning and losing. There are people out there willing to see themselves badly injured in a traffic accident as long as they believe that doing so was consistent with their correct interpretation of the traffic laws. 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:Dubar's Number]] for more information about large groups like this. If you can't fix the problem from within English Wikipedia, then the problems are likely to be unfixable. Andrew, it is not the size of the group that is the issue, but how that group is managed. And there is a huge cultural difference between control and management. It all rests with the skillful leadership of that group. It is my professional business to know such things. As I understand it you do very good work with some very problematical individuals, but those individuals have a very strong incentive for co-operation. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Andrew's observation. Size does matter. In education, smaller classes and smaller schools tend to have better results than big learning factories. The question remains: how can that observation be used to greater advantage? Ec ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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 has not yet been written. Jimbo would have to make it a major in-community priority of his, or Arbcom would have to make it a major in-community priority of theirs, to make it faster. I think Jimbo's too busy and Arbcom is too unwieldy in one sense and focused on more specific problems. We shouldn't be looking for a panacea. When everyone expects a detailed examination of his petty problems by Arbcom he becomes a big part of the reasons for its disfunctionality. Ec ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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 Wikinews as an example of the problem, rather than the solution. on 2/5/09 4:36 PM, Ray Saintonge at sainto...@telus.net wrote: I think he misunderstood something. Cary said: Maybe Wikinews can even come up with a model that can be adopted by other projects. Marc seems to have read this as though they already had. Thank you, Ray, I did misread it a bit. But, on the other hand, a model set here by Wikinews is the fact that someone from there is actually openly objecting and calling attention to it. That is the beginning of a successful model. Marc ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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 up with? I thought you were citing Wikinews as an example of the problem, rather than the solution. I think he misunderstood something. Cary said: Maybe Wikinews can even come up with a model that can be adopted by other projects. Marc seems to have read this as though they already had. Considering that the emphasis on has in all-caps indicates that Marc thought he was correcting that statement by Cary, I have a hard time seeing how what Cary said could be the basis for Marc's assertion. --Michael Snow ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
2009/2/5 George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com: 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 users. If Jimbo had Jimbo's God-Emperor powers this would happen too. It hasn't, because he doesn't. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com 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 users. Even being a long time positive contributor cannot overcome the damage done to the community and other editors in particular when one problem abusive user persists. The damage is both severe in the acute sense and insidious in the long term community values sense. I disagree that divine intervention is a solution, but I agree with the principle that a productive editor who cannot collaborate is not a productive editor. Perhaps you and others can take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Collaboration_first , and put together a convincing essay to that effect. Convincing the silent majority to take a cohesive stance against such behaviour is one possible solution. -- Yours cordially, Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility atwikinews [en] warning: contains rant
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Phil Nash pn007a2...@blueyonder.co.ukwrote: ...and it's always (in my experience) a difficult dichotomy between kicking these people out of the door and culturing their behaviour so as to benefit the encyclopedia. I think this is somewhat of a false dichotomy - making a good faith effort to warn and discuss and work with problematic editors is almost always the best course, with banning an unfortunate less desirable second choice if the situation persists for long periods of time. Most people do respond well to good faith efforts to get them to behave better... -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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. If you can't fix the problem from within English Wikipedia, then the problems are likely to be unfixable. Can we use this idea to good advantage? Some of us have indeed found our time best spent in smaller projects. Perhaps participation in a WikiProject in a subject of one's choosing should be a prerequisite to adminship. That could give the person experience in co-operation. Ec ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility atwikinews [en] warning: contains rant
be collegiate, these editors don't get it and rely on [[WP:TRUTH]]. Sorry, but they should be invited to contribute somewhere else. That's a wonderful idea. I will be starting Fightopedia, a Wikipedia clone for people who want to cut each other's throats out over article content. No civility allowed, you will be called names and banned on sight if you're spotted being civil. skype: node.ue 2009/2/5 Phil Nash pn007a2...@blueyonder.co.uk: Jesse (Pathoschild) wrote: George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com 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 users. Even being a long time positive contributor cannot overcome the damage done to the community and other editors in particular when one problem abusive user persists. The damage is both severe in the acute sense and insidious in the long term community values sense. I disagree that divine intervention is a solution, but I agree with the principle that a productive editor who cannot collaborate is not a productive editor. Perhaps you and others can take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Collaboration_first , and put together a convincing essay to that effect. Convincing the silent majority to take a cohesive stance against such behaviour is one possible solution. -- Yours cordially, Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild) For every hundred or so editors whose only contributions are vandalism, there may be one or two editors with long-term positive contributions but who have issues with working with less-gifted editors, but who fail the behavioural standards, and it's always (in my experience) a difficult dichotomy between kicking these people out of the door and culturing their behaviour so as to benefit the encyclopedia. On balance, I feel that these editors are too much trouble to be worth expending effort on; their specialist expertise is not necessarily unique, and the content they bring could equally be brought by someone else. Although our ethos is intended to ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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 michaeldavi...@comcast.net: 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 atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day. And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would you have done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in silence? That, alone, speaks volumes. Marc Riddell -- From: bawolff bawolff...@gmail.com Reply-To: bawolff...@gmail.com, Wikinews mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 22:34:14 -0700 To: Wikinews mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant [I happened to stumble upon what appears to be an aftermath of an edit war, and am quite disgusted by it. The following is basically a rant about it, as I'm not really sure how best to bring it up] I've recently noticed a marked increased in incivility between contributors on Wikinews. I find this really disturbing as it is often between admins who one would think know better. For example (And I'm not trying to pick on anyone, these are just some random ones i came across): *But no, you've gotta be an asshole just like always *A small amount of brain activity would lead to the presumption that someone in my position knows what they're doing *I suggest you get the fuck off your high horse or get the fuck out of dodge *they are _MY_ comment sections and _I_ can write what ever the hell _I_ want. Now, I know I am taking these out of context, but to be blunt I don't care if the context was responding to poop vandalism - It is incredibly inappropriate for admins to say these things under any circumstances. If these were new users making these comments, they would have been blocked in the neighborhood of 2 weeks to a year, maybe even indefinitely. How can we really expect to recruit and retain new contributors, when this is how the long time contributors are treated? -Bawolff ___ Wikinews-l mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
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. Fred 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 atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day. And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email conversation with you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would you have done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in silence? That, alone, speaks volumes. Marc Riddell -- From: bawolff bawolff...@gmail.com Reply-To: bawolff...@gmail.com, Wikinews mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 22:34:14 -0700 To: Wikinews mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant [I happened to stumble upon what appears to be an aftermath of an edit war, and am quite disgusted by it. The following is basically a rant about it, as I'm not really sure how best to bring it up] I've recently noticed a marked increased in incivility between contributors on Wikinews. I find this really disturbing as it is often between admins who one would think know better. For example (And I'm not trying to pick on anyone, these are just some random ones i came across): *But no, you've gotta be an asshole just like always *A small amount of brain activity would lead to the presumption that someone in my position knows what they're doing *I suggest you get the fuck off your high horse or get the fuck out of dodge *they are _MY_ comment sections and _I_ can write what ever the hell _I_ want. Now, I know I am taking these out of context, but to be blunt I don't care if the context was responding to poop vandalism - It is incredibly inappropriate for admins to say these things under any circumstances. If these were new users making these comments, they would have been blocked in the neighborhood of 2 weeks to a year, maybe even indefinitely. How can we really expect to recruit and retain new contributors, when this is how the long time contributors are treated? -Bawolff ___ Wikinews-l mailing list wikinew...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant
--- On Thu, 2/5/09, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: From: George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility at wikinews [en] warning: contains rant To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Thursday, February 5, 2009, 3:56 PM On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.ukwrote: 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 playing really nice with offenders, rather than playing nasty hardball. We could politely play nasty hardball, and squash a few people under our polite polished jackboots of propriety. It wouldn't necessarily be a self-contradiction to use excessive force to try and impose politeness. That said, the ultimate problem is community interaction issues that incivility and abuse cause, and abusive admin responses make *that* worse even if we help the incivility problem, so it's probably not a wise approach. That said, making more of the civility blocks stick would be helpful. The sense of the community that some of the problematic contributors are more worth having than asking to leave is probably a mistake. Personally I think that is the wrong approach. It would be most effective to move the center. There are always going to be people who feel the need to be shocking. If we can get the people who are only occasionally rude or who are just crossing the line of civility to follow consistently higher standards, then I think that extreme cases will improve also. That sort of approach should be more successful than making blocks stick for the extreme cases. Birgitte SB ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] FW: [Wikinews-l] Increased incivility atwikinews [en] warning: contains rant
Phil Nash wrote: who have issues with working with less-gifted editors, but who fail the behavioural standards, and it's always (in my experience) a difficult dichotomy between kicking these people out of the door and culturing their behaviour so as to benefit the encyclopedia. On balance, I feel that these editors are too much trouble to be worth expending effort on; People who get carried away by their own feelings, should better attend to tasks where their feelings matter less. If an otherwise productive user tends to get involved in POV/NPOV fights, perhaps they should try to proofread scanned books in Wikisource instead of writing articles on controversial topics in Wikipedia. All their energy can be better used when the only goal is to get the letters and words right, instead of getting the opinions right. Next time, instead of banning them from Wikipedia, see if you can recruit them to Wikisource. -- Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Call for participation in Epistemia, a new wiki encyclopedia
Hi, On 2/4/09, Patton 123 patton...@gmail.com wrote: I would also like to say that a community run by a http://meta.epistemia.org/wiki/Council is a community destined to fail... I beg to differ. A community run by a democratically-elected council of active community members seems, to myself at least, a step forwards from the largely-autocratic, detached management committees that are so prevalent in this day and age among Internet community projects. —Thomas Larsen ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Call for participation in Epistemia, a new wiki encyclopedia
Hi all, On 2/4/09, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: Basically you've just said we're going to be just like wikipdia except we won't let incivlity, personal attacks and other bad stuff like that happen. How will you stop it? Blocking? Then you're just like wikipedia. Actually, no. Wikipedia no longer enforces civility. At least not against aggressive well-established players like Giano. Actually, it never did much. So, whoever is aggressive and persistent can determine the content of the information on the 8th largest website. Fred Bauder has it exactly right. Wikipedians now accept incivility and rudeness as part of their daily operations. Worse, some of them seem to believe that it's actually a _good_ thing. Epistemia's culture, from the very start, will be one where incivility and rudeness are rejected without question. Indeed, our policy (found at http://meta.epistemia.org/wiki/Policy, and it's all on one page, by the way!) states that [i]n order to maintain a positive community and a productive environment in which to work, users who deliberately engage in serious or repeated violations of these standards may be banned indefinitely from participating, regardless of the quality or extent of their work on the project. That's a far cry from Wikipedia's civility policy, which states that [a] pattern of incivility is disruptive and unacceptable, and may result in blocks if it rises to the level of harassment or egregious personal attacks—Wikipedia is so keen to attract contributors that it only blocks people for incivility if that incivility rises to the level of harassment or personal attacks. I invite you to step up, create an account at Epistemia, and start contributing—or, at least, offer your views and give constructive criticism. We're open to improvement. —Thomas Larsen ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Call for participation in Epistemia, a new wiki encyclopedia
Thomas Larsen wrote: Hi all, On 2/4/09, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: Basically you've just said we're going to be just like wikipdia except we won't let incivlity, personal attacks and other bad stuff like that happen. How will you stop it? Blocking? Then you're just like wikipedia. Actually, no. Wikipedia no longer enforces civility. At least not against aggressive well-established players like Giano. Actually, it never did much. So, whoever is aggressive and persistent can determine the content of the information on the 8th largest website. Fred Bauder has it exactly right. Wikipedians now accept incivility and rudeness as part of their daily operations. Worse, some of them seem to believe that it's actually a _good_ thing. I must be editing in the wrong places, because I make thousands of edits yet rarely encounter incivility. On the mailing lists, sure, but rarely on the wiki. Where I do, it's extremely limited cases that are almost entirely predictable. One is deletion. I generally these days write in areas where it doesn't come up. But when I tried covering pop culture it was pretty annoying to deal with (despite meticulous sourcing), and made it pretty easy to get into conflicts. The other is controversial topics with clear partisans --- Israel/Palestine, Hindu nationalism, Balkan nationalism, topical political issues, religion-related articles, etc. But it'd tricky to figure out how to avoid *that*. I personally would argue for expansive conflict-of-interest rules: when writing about a Croatian-Serbian conflict, for example, anyone who is connected with Croatia or Serbia or their cultures should recuse themselves when discussion gets heated. But generally Wikipedia's declined to consider this a conflict of interest on par with editing your own business's article. If that isn't going to be done, I think the only effect of civility rules will be to create simmering passive-aggresive conflicts, which to some extent already happens (the 3RR just means partisans revert 3x per day every day for months on end). But the vast majority of the encyclopedia isn't either of those, so I'm not sure why people are seeing incivility everywhere? -Mark ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
