[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] 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] 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] 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 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 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
