AGK wrote:
I would echo my suggestion (with the exception of bickering ;-))
that a proactive approach is needed to break what seems to be the
intractability of this disagreement. Assessing whether this proposal
is successful (i.e., whether it becomes a useful tool) would be most
Thomas Dalton wrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Hm. Well, as for myself, I was striving for unanimity.
You won't get it. Dispute
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Fred Bauderfredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
snip
An example of the sort of thing we might discuss on a dispute resolution
mailing list.
Why not discuss on this list?
Carcharoth
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
2009/6/28 Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Fred Bauderfredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
snip
An example of the sort of thing we might discuss on a dispute resolution
mailing list.
Why not discuss on this list?
I agree. This list, or the village pump,
2009/6/28 Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com:
Needs saying that dispute resolution is an ambiguous term. What it
means in an RfC is not what it means in Arbitration. What it means in an
edit war is an iterative process by which troublesome points get ironed
out. What it means in
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Note: Why not make it a general dres-l and let all language wikis
submit?
Because multi-lingual mailing lists don't work. I don't want my inbox
full of emails written in
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
[Gossip] - We talk about whatever people start threads on. If you have
other
discussion topics within the scope of the mailing list (like this one,
for example), then start threads for them.
[Bonk] - That's
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Because this is not a dispute resolution mailing list, as it once was. The
dispute resolution mailing lists - are now closed-source.
I've been on this list for years, I don't remember it ever being a DR list.
2009/6/28 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Because this is not a dispute resolution mailing list, as it once was. The
dispute resolution mailing lists - are now closed-source.
I've been on this list for years, I don't remember it ever being a DR
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Note: Why not make it a general dres-l and let all language wikis
submit?
Because multi-lingual mailing lists don't work. I don't
David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
It used to be a place to send unblock requests. These then went to
unblock-en-l, which is now all but moribund.
Well, there you go.
Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
wikipedia-l is pretty much dormant. I haven't counted, but I'd guess
it
stevertigo wrote:
Hm. I guess I may have been going all the way back to 2003-5. The days when
Jimbo sorted everything out and blasted everyone with wikilove.
Right. The old days, where there was some chance of coming up with right
answers by kicking ideas around. Before we actually
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Ah, but you aren't abusing logic by ignoring the fact that each language has
its own list anyway are you? My point dealt with the historical usage of
wikipedia-l as the *only mailing list, and by
default/convention/necessity/genius was an international
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Emily Monroe bluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
Just to add my voice in the conversation...
We usually employ the idiom two cents, but you are right - voice [to] the
conversation is formal and probably translates quite well. Adding my two
rupees.. probably doesn't
Emily Monroe bluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
Too much can happen.
Stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah. But could you please clarify what specifically you mean by the terms
too much
and can happen?
Note: For some reason, in my previous post, Emilys statement above was shown
unthreaded in the
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Because this is not a dispute resolution mailing list, as it once was.
The
dispute resolution mailing lists - are now closed-source.
I've been on this list for years, I don't remember it ever being a DR
list.
It is a general purpose list to discuss
stevertigo wrote:
Hm. I guess I may have been going all the way back to 2003-5. The days
when
Jimbo sorted everything out and blasted everyone with wikilove.
Right. The old days, where there was some chance of coming up with right
answers by kicking ideas around. Before we actually
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Ah, but you aren't abusing logic by ignoring the fact that each
language has
its own list anyway are you? My point dealt with the historical usage
of
wikipedia-l as the *only mailing list, and by
default/convention/necessity/genius was an international
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.netwrote:
It used to be a place to send unblock requests. These then went to
unblock-en-l, which is now all but moribund.
- d.
Not really, I've been attending to it and have either unblocked or
created accounts for about
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Ah, but you aren't abusing logic by ignoring the fact that each language
has
its own list anyway are you? My point dealt with the historical usage of
wikipedia-l as the
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Ah, but you aren't abusing logic by ignoring the fact that each language
has
its own list anyway are you? My point dealt with the
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
No
So what was your point?
Erm, I was answering.. your question.
-Stevertigo
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:13 PM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
Interesting point, but in reality we just use the terms informal,
idiomatic or colloquial (language/speech) to deal with expressions that
are not formal, and thus more direct.
Correction: ..not formal or direct.
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
No
So what was your point?
Erm, I was answering.. your question.
No, before that. You mentioned wikipedia-l in reference to
multilingual lists being a success but
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
No, before that. You mentioned wikipedia-l in reference to
multilingual lists being a success but wikipedia-l is neither
multilingual nor a success, so I fail to see your point.
You definition of success is
2009/6/28 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
No, before that. You mentioned wikipedia-l in reference to
multilingual lists being a success but wikipedia-l is neither
multilingual nor a success, so I fail to see your
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 8:13 PM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
Good point, Emily. Ironically enough though, Arbcom itself doesn't
participate much in openly discussing its cases. Strange isn't it?
If you catch us in a good mood, maybe. :-)
[I'm currently one of those arbitrators, if
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.comwrote:
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 8:13 PM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote:
Ironically enough though, Arbcom itself doesn't participate much in
openly
discussing its cases. Strange isn't it?
If you catch us in a good
Good point, Emily. Ironically enough though, Arbcom itself doesn't
participate much in openly discussing its cases. Strange isn't it?
-Stevertigo
Not really, doing the work is hard enough. Additional communication is on
top of that. If decisions are made privately, it would have to be
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
Good point, Emily. Ironically enough though, Arbcom itself doesn't
participate much in openly discussing its cases. Strange isn't it?
Not really, doing the work is hard enough. Additional communication is on
top of
Just a little nitpick: metamorphic is not used in linguistics - the
lingustic term is morphological, but I understand you probably mean
idiomatic or 'conceptually amorphous.'
I meant slang words, idioms, etc. Is that what you're talking about?
I read everything you've written here and didn't
AGK wrote:
Interpersonal disputes? Again, how is a mailing list better? and
what happens when only one party joins the mailing list?
My understanding is that the list would not be a forum for dispute
resolution, but rather a forum for discussion of dispute resolution (and of
ongoing
Interpersonal disputes? Again, how is a mailing list better? and
what happens when only one party joins the mailing list?
My understanding is that the list would not be a forum for dispute
resolution, but rather a forum for discussion of dispute resolution (and of
ongoing disputes on enwiki)
AGK wrote:
Interpersonal disputes? Again, how is a mailing list better? and
what happens when only one party joins the mailing list?
My understanding is that the list would not be a forum for dispute
resolution, but rather a forum for discussion of dispute resolution
(and of
ongoing
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
In general, and whenever an issue arises. For example, one topic
frequently discussed on the other lists is Biographies of living persons,
a policy which originated with Jimbo via the arbcom list.
I don't remember
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
In general, and whenever an issue arises. For example, one topic
frequently discussed on the other lists is Biographies of living persons,
a policy which originated with
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.netwrote:
on 6/27/09 10:10 AM, Fred Bauder at fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
The idea is to have a mailing list for the general membership to discuss
dispute resolution, including information about ongoing controversies.
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
I see Risker has already asked for a definition of the purpose of such a
list. My feeling so far is that this is all rather [[Blind men and an
elephant]]: different people come up with different aspects
stevertigo wrote:
CM: If it descends to X is a disruptive editor so something should
be done one can expect some fairly primitive knockabout.
Is primitive knockabout any worse or better than organized and
modernistic knockabout?
Here's a literary answer I bring out every few years:
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Here's a literary answer I bring out every few years: Solzhenitsyn in
First Circle described the use of chalk and blackboards to resolve
disputes (in the context of scientists in a camp supposed to
As far as I know, it wasn't an announcement, it was sending up a trial
balloon amongst a known group who was likely to critique it honestly but
fairly, before taking it public. Strikes me that happens all the time, and
doesn't necessarily have to involve foundation-related lists but could be
any
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:01 PM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
please accept this is* a kind of ...
as*
-Stevertigo
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
You know, we don't really *need* everybody's agreement to create the mailing
list. If an editor is interested is genuinely interested in setting up
DR-en-l (ugh, the abbreviations begin...), they are free to file a request
with a developer over bugzilla or over IRC. Those that wish to may join.
AGK wrote:
Let's be proactive - rather than bicker and debate endlessly (in
the exhaustive yet courteous manner that only Wikipedians are able to).
You know, it doesn't actually help people to be thoughtful to label
discussion bickering because some comments are negative.
I happen to
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:12 PM, AGK wiki...@googlemail.com wrote:
You know, we don't really *need* everybody's agreement to create the
mailing
list. If an editor is interested is genuinely interested in setting up
DR-en-l (ugh, the abbreviations begin...), they are free to file a request
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Hm. Well, as for myself, I was striving for unanimity.
You won't get it. Dispute resolution is too controversial a topic for
that. You might manage consensus on some fairly
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Hm. Well, as for myself, I was striving for unanimity.
You won't get it. Dispute resolution is too controversial a topic for
that. You
AGK wrote:
Let's be proactive - rather than bicker and debate endlessly (in
the exhaustive yet courteous manner that only Wikipedians are able to).
You know, it doesn't actually help people to be thoughtful to label
discussion bickering because some comments are negative.
I happen to
Just to add my voice in the conversation...
I also don't think it's a good idea to have a mailing list to have
dispute resolution to happen. Too much can happen. People will be
unable or unwilling to join, etc. *About* resolution is another
matter--I have no opinion about that.
I also find
Perhaps we suffer more from a superfluity of forums for discussion
than a shortage of them--with the one exception of a definitive
process of settling content issues., I doubt a mailing list would
work for that one.
t
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
I think its time we had a mailing list set up explicitly for all dispute
resolution issues.
I mean wikien doesn't deal with these anymore, Arbcom and Medcom lists are
closed-source,
and* its been almost six years since the formal process for handling
disputes got started in the first place (Oct 2
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 12:04 AM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
I think its time we had a mailing list set up explicitly for all dispute
resolution issues.
I mean wikien doesn't deal with these anymore, Arbcom and Medcom lists are
closed-source,
and* its been almost six years since the
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Al Tally majorly.w...@googlemail.comwrote:
What's wrong with the wiki, for wiki-related things?
I have not said anything was wrong with the wiki, only that there should
be a mailing list for dealing with dispute resolution. Can you clarify your
question a
I think its time we had a mailing list set up explicitly for all dispute
resolution issues.
I mean wikien doesn't deal with these anymore, Arbcom and Medcom lists
are
closed-source,
and* its been almost six years since the formal process for handling
disputes got started in the first place
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 12:04 AM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
I think its time we had a mailing list set up explicitly for all
dispute
resolution issues.
I mean wikien doesn't deal with these anymore, Arbcom and Medcom lists
are
closed-source,
and* its been almost six years since
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
Public dispute resolution happens on wiki, private dispute resolution
happens on closed mailing lists. Where is the gap in the market that
would be filled by a public dispute resolution mailing list?
Thomas, the
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.netwrote:
No problem, we might as well take a stab at it. However, my experience
here is of deadlock, not resolution. Deadlock characterized by sterile
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
Public dispute resolution happens on wiki, private dispute resolution
happens on closed mailing lists. Where is the gap in the market that
would be filled by a public dispute
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.netwrote:
The List would need two (at least) Moderators: One that would be very
familiar with the technical and policy aspects of the Project; and one that
could focus on the interpersonal dialogue itself.
I nominate Fred
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
Public dispute resolution happens on wiki, private dispute resolution
happens on closed mailing lists. Where is the gap in the market that
would be filled by a public dispute
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Marc Riddell
michaeldavi...@comcast.netwrote:
The List would need two (at least) Moderators: One that would be very
familiar with the technical and policy aspects of the Project; and one
that
could focus on the interpersonal dialogue itself.
I nominate
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Thomas, the distinctions you present -- that dispute resolution has
public
and private dimensions, and that these different dimensions of dispute
resolution require
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Marc Riddell
michaeldavi...@comcast.netwrote:
The List would need two (at least) Moderators: One that would be very
familiar with the technical and policy aspects of the Project; and one
that
could focus on the interpersonal dialogue itself.
I nominate
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:17 PM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Thomas, the distinctions you present -- that dispute resolution has
public
and private dimensions, and
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
You could start a thread called if it ain't broke don't fix it and there
we can debate whether the axiom applies to anything other than appliances.
:-)
That's not an axiom, it is a consequence of the definitions of broke
and fix.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
Contact a server admin on IRC in #wikimedia-tech
I've filed a bug on mediazilla - with a link to this discussion.
-Stevertigo
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
You could start a thread called if it ain't broke don't fix it and
there
we can debate whether the axiom applies to anything other than
appliances.
:-)
That's not an
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:17 PM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Thomas Dalton
thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Thomas, the distinctions you present -- that dispute resolution has
public
and private dimensions, and
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
It's a bit unclear what problem this list (these lists?) would be intended
to solve.
Great comments, Risker.
For one, we don't always do things to solve problems - sometimes we do
things because they are experimental or
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
You could start a thread called if it ain't broke don't fix it
and
there
we can debate whether the axiom applies to
2009/6/27 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
It would allow subscribers to keep track of what is going on. It would
not try to engage in dispute resolution but discuss it and point to it.
That's a different idea to the one I believe was originally proposed.
I don't really object to your idea.
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
It's a bit unclear what problem this list (these lists?) would be intended
to solve.
Great comments, Risker.
For one, we don't always do things to solve problems - sometimes we do
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
You could start a thread called if it ain't broke don't fix it and
there
we can debate whether the axiom applies to anything other than
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
For one, we don't always do things to solve problems - sometimes we do
things because they are experimental or synergistic.
Ok, you may not want to solve a problem, but
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
It would allow subscribers to keep track of what is going on. It would
not try to engage in dispute resolution but discuss it and point to it.
That's a different idea
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com:
Hm. So you are saying that definitions have consequences?
Yes. A logical argument generally starts by defining some terms and
stating a few axioms and following logical
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
I would actually suggest two lists, if we could do this -
One, an announce-only list which summarized ongoing dispute resolution
(arbcom cases, RFCs, community discussions of note elsewhere) for
those who find
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
I would actually suggest two lists, if we could do this -
One, an announce-only list which summarized ongoing dispute resolution
(arbcom cases, RFCs, community
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
Stevertigo, from experience I know it takes some time to set up a mailing
list (we're talking weeks, not days). Why not start one on Google groups
and
see how many people sign up?
Risker, from experience, I know what you
2009/6/27 stevertigo stv...@gmail.com
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
I would actually suggest two lists, if we could do this -
One, an announce-only list which summarized ongoing dispute
resolution
(arbcom cases, RFCs, community
2009/6/27 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
It would allow subscribers to keep track of what is going on. It would
not try to engage in dispute resolution but discuss it and point to it.
That's a different idea to the one I believe was originally proposed.
I don't really object to your
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
It is Wikimedia business. It would not be appropriate to involve a third
party.
Well, I took his meaning to be something like go Google yourself, albeit
put in very nice terms.
Yes, we might develop an ability to
No, it was not intended that way, Steve. I do know that Brion has a very
long job queue, and mailing lists haven't been his top priority for a long
time. If the WMF powers that be consider it a priority, then it will move up
in his list; if not, then you may be in for quite a wait.
Risker
83 matches
Mail list logo
