On Dec 11, 2011 10:03 PM, "Daniel R. Tobias" wrote:
>
> While the design and user interface of Wikipedia certainly has things
> that could stand improvement, I generally like the fact that it's not
> run by a "billion dollar budget" commercial outfit brimming with
> meddlesome marketing and manage
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 15:01:33 +, Charles Matthews wrote:
> That said, I deprecate getting "design" issues mixed up with others. The
> use of emotive terms such as cold and unfriendly implies things about
> intention and fault that aren't exactly helpful. I don't know whether
> arguing that WP i
On 11 December 2011 14:13, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Our own internal discussions have long reflected on the unfriendliness and
> undue bureaucracy of Wikipedia. Generally we're good at the trade-off but
> if we start claiming with a straight face that it's benign rather than a
> necessary evil we'll
Our own internal discussions have long reflected on the unfriendliness and
undue bureaucracy of Wikipedia. Generally we're good at the trade-off but
if we start claiming with a straight face that it's benign rather than a
necessary evil we'll have lost something important.
While the complainant he
On 5 December 2011 22:08, Nathan wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Charles Matthews
> wrote:
>
> >
> > I can quite see why people do think Wikipedia "Byzantine", which is the
> > basic message of what we are talking about. Probably trainee medics curse
> > the immune system as unreasonab
Its also the case that even our complex systems are not easy to navigate and
that the wiki system can be very confusing for new users beyond just the
complexity of our bureaucracy. In the example that sparked this conversation,
the new editor struggled to understand the difference between deleti
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Charles Matthews
wrote:
>>
>>
> AfD can get it wrong: I suppose that is common ground. "Notability" as a
> concept is broken, always has been, always will be (my view, not
> necessarily the majority view given the status given to the GNG by some).
> In some cases i
On 6/12/2011 4:02 a.m., Fred Bauder wrote:
>> I can quite see why people do think Wikipedia "Byzantine", which is the
>> basic message of what we are talking about. Probably trainee medics curse
>> the immune system as unreasonably complicated. The metaphor doesn't seem
>> to
>> me either too def
>
> I can quite see why people do think Wikipedia "Byzantine", which is the
> basic message of what we are talking about. Probably trainee medics curse
> the immune system as unreasonably complicated. The metaphor doesn't seem
> to
> me either too defensive or too stretched. I think we should bear
On 5 December 2011 09:52, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> On 12/04/11 1:10 PM, Will Beback wrote:
>
>
> > I've noticed that a lot of critics of Wikipedia began by trying to
> promote
> > some non-notable cause only to be rebuffed.
> >
>
> Do we get anywhere when we approach a problem with such an attit
On 12/03/11 7:56 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> http://daggle.com/closed-unfriendly-world-wikipedia-2853
>
> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
> the unfriendliness of the environment. It isn't so much that we've
> gone out of our way to be unfriendly, but the tool we
On 12/04/11 1:10 PM, Will Beback wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
>> http://daggle.com/closed-unfriendly-world-wikipedia-2853
>>
>> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
>> the unfriendliness of the environment. It isn't so much that we'
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> http://daggle.com/closed-unfriendly-world-wikipedia-2853
>
> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
> the unfriendliness of the environment. It isn't so much that we've
> gone out of our way to be unfriendly, bu
On 4 December 2011 16:58, Charles Matthews
wrote:
> On 4 December 2011 03:56, Tony Sidaway wrote:
>
>> http://daggle.com/closed-unfriendly-world-wikipedia-2853
>>
>> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
>> the unfriendliness of the environment.
>
>
> Well covered
On 4 December 2011 03:56, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> http://daggle.com/closed-unfriendly-world-wikipedia-2853
>
> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
> the unfriendliness of the environment.
Well covered in The Signpost, in fact. But I came away thinking that there
> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
>> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
>> the unfriendliness of the environment. It isn't so much that we've
>> gone out of our way to be unfriendly, but the tool we use to
>> interact--the wiki, in other wor
> http://daggle.com/closed-unfriendly-world-wikipedia-2853
>
> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
> the unfriendliness of the environment. It isn't so much that we've
> gone out of our way to be unfriendly, but the tool we use to
> interact--the wiki, in other wo
There's sort of two components to this problem. There's the human
behavior component, which is a super tough nut to crack. And then
there is the institutional component; among the most common complaints
about Wikipedia are its bureaucracy and the complexity of
contributing. Solving the institutiona
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
> the unfriendliness of the environment. It isn't so much that we've
> gone out of our way to be unfriendly, but the tool we use to
> interact--the wiki, in other words--isn
http://daggle.com/closed-unfriendly-world-wikipedia-2853
Now whatever the merits of his case, this chap does have a point about
the unfriendliness of the environment. It isn't so much that we've
gone out of our way to be unfriendly, but the tool we use to
interact--the wiki, in other words--isn't
20 matches
Mail list logo
