A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
53 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
I'm proposing that we start a resolution-l mailing list.

Yes, I know we talked about it a month ago, to the tune of about 100
posts, and it seemed that it wasn't going anywhere. But that was just
appearances. The reality is that the support was substantial, the
opposition was sub-articulate, and whatever substantive criticism
there was was largely based in some assumed misconceptions about its
scope (Thomas).

The real truth is that we have been waiting for Cary to fulfill one of
his many duties and create the list. That having failed, we have been
waiting on Cary to tell us why he has not. That also having failed, we
instead have just been waiting a month for Cary to say anything at
all. And he recently did, though there was little substance in it,
other than a threat to close the bug request. Which in fact, he just
did close as WONTFIX:
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19414 . I'm sure he
thinks he's doing the right thing. Still, despite our recent
differences, we should welcome Cary's actual participation in our
discussion. Thank you Cary, we understand that you were just too busy
to give this proper consideration.

Anyway, we were talking about an open list for discussing dispute
resolution. Its scope will be broad, and its purpose will be to be
helpful. It will discuss particular disputes in general, conceptual,
and editorial terms, and facilitate immediate on-wiki dispute
resolution processes. It will also discuss dispute resolution concepts
in general, wherever that goes.

-Stevertigo
Architect of WP:CIVIL,
creator of Arbcom,
Inventor of those WP:Shortcuts

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Carcharoth
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 9:01 AM, stevertigo<[hidden email]> wrote:

<snip>

> Architect of WP:CIVIL,
> creator of Arbcom,
> Inventor of those WP:Shortcuts

That's funny.

You may not want my advice, and I probably shouldn't be giving it, but
why not start small on this? New mailing lists don't come along all
that often. Start something on this list, with threads marked clearly
so people can avoid them if they don't want to read them. Set some
ground rules. See if the idea takes off. If it does, then go back and
ask again. If it doesn't take off, then it probably wasn't such a
great idea after all. Volunteer resources are finite, after all.

Carcharoth

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:10 AM, Carcharoth<[hidden email]> wrote:

> That's funny.

What's funny?

> You may not want my advice, and I probably shouldn't be giving it..

Eh. True.

I'm looking for either support or dissent. Support I can deal with.
Dissent I can deal with too. :-)
And we can't trust people to title threads properly anyway -
unrealistic usage of email.

-Stevertigo
PS: Waves should make things easier though - maybe we can get some
beta code and setup support?

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

WJhonson
I have to agree with the idea, posted a bit ago, that a new email list
is a bit of a backdoor if we're all for transparency.  Discussions
about the dispute resolution process, might get more input, if done
in-universe.  I'm not sure why you want a new channel.

Will


-----Original Message-----
From: stevertigo <[hidden email]>
To: English Wikipedia <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tue, Jul 28, 2009 1:44 am
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l










On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:10 AM,
Carcharoth<[hidden email]> wrote:

> That's funny.

What's funny?

> You may not want my advice, and I probably shouldn't be giving it..

Eh. True.

I'm looking for either support or dissent. Support I can deal with.
Dissent I can deal with too. :-)
And we can't trust people to title threads properly anyway -
unrealistic usage of email.

-Stevertigo
PS: Waves should make things easier though - maybe we can get some
beta code and setup support?

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l






_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Charles Matthews
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
stevertigo wrote:
> I'm proposing that we start a resolution-l mailing list.
>
> Yes, I know we talked about it a month ago, to the tune of about 100
> posts, and it seemed that it wasn't going anywhere. But that was just
> appearances. The reality is that the support was substantial, the
> opposition was sub-articulate, and whatever substantive criticism
> there was was largely based in some assumed misconceptions about its
> scope (Thomas).
>  
Can you not do this thing of bad-mouthing people who disagree with you?
(See your attitude to Cary Bass.) I seem to remember a thread with a
very different feel. You had some support from Fred Bauder, who likes
the idea of discussing dispute resolution. You had very definite
opposition from me. You can call me sub-articulate all you like, but I
don't think it will stick.
> Anyway, we were talking about an open list for discussing dispute
> resolution. Its scope will be broad, and its purpose will be to be
> helpful. It will discuss particular disputes in general, conceptual,
> and editorial terms, and facilitate immediate on-wiki dispute
> resolution processes. It will also discuss dispute resolution concepts
> in general, wherever that goes.
>
>  
And my point is that your broad brush means the second sentence would
self-contradict, in a welter of meddling and advocacy. If that's the
intended remit (everything up to and including the kitchen sink) then
there was no misunderstanding at all about the scope.

Charles



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by WJhonson
Bod Notbod<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I like transparency too.
> It makes me pause to wonder whether a dispute resolution mailing list
> is actually against the grain of that.

I understand this point, and I have made it myself in the past - both
with regard to mailing lists, and with regard to the use of IRC.  My
main issues with both forums dealt with access - mailing lists may
require subscription, and typical IRC usage will expose one's IP
address. In reality though, our mailing lists - at least the public
ones - allow non-subscriber posting, and easy to read web archiving,
and freenode now has a web interface at webchat.freenode.net .

Its also true that while email has its problems (waves or something
like it may be able to help), note also that discussion threads on
wiki are also not ideal (waves again) - still email's continued usage
means it is still quite canonical when it comes to dealing with
high-level discussions.

This list for example has been the place for discussing most major
issues on enwiki since '01-'02. And likewise, the point is not to
circumvent or replace on-wiki handling of specific issues, rather to
augment and enhance the overall handling of disputes. We also need a
bit of a terminology change, as I stated previously - we don't have
'edit wars' anymore - we just have editorial disputes.

Anyway, while I appreciate an absurdist argument as much as anyone
(hence the title of this thread) its at the very least extremely
ironic to call an open mailing list 'opaque' or 'lacking transparency'
considering that so much of official dispute resolution at this point
happens on private discussion lists. Resolution-l would not replace
arbcom-l or medcom-l (using what their proper names would be) - rather
it would simply augment and strengthen overall dispute resolution
handling.

If a channel is not open, it's potency and resonance are already muffled.

> I've only recently signed up to a couple of the mailing lists as I intend to get (and am getting) more
> involved with Wikipedia. These lists have a pretty low profile, I'd
> say.

I know you've been around on the wiki for a while, though, right?
Again, I understand the point of keeping things on-wiki, but the fact
of the matter is that on-wiki discussions are often less than ideal -
and less than visible - something required when dealing with issues
that are far-reaching.

> Whilst these mailing lists are, I believe, open for everyone to join,
> it still strikes me as a bit of a back door: I would have thought it
> far more transparent to deal with all dispute resolution on the wiki
> itself where people can see what's going on (and people can place
> relevant links easily) rather than in an email list which is going to
> have a rather different audience.

Same points as above. Linking is a trivial issue, and shouldn't really
affect our discussion here. Technical solutions might also help, but
these have not even been implemented here on wikien-l.

> To put it another way, if I were an editor in dispute with someone
> else and I wasn't subscribed to the mailing list and I become aware
> the other person was discussing it there, I think I'd rightly feel
> that there was something "going on" in a sort of conspiratorial way
> and that a conscious effort had been made to circumvent tackling my
> points.

Keep in mind you are making the same misconceptions that Thomas did.
The resolution-l forum is not for getting into details about how to
handle

> The wiki (en, at least) doesn't seem short of ways and means to deal
> with disputes. I'm somewhat sceptical about the motivation in creating
> a new channel for disputes that requires all parties to sign up for an
> email service to be fully cognisant of where that dispute is heading.

You are contradicting yourself - on the one hand you acknowledge that
an open list does not require subscription, and on the other you claim
that signing up is required.

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Charles
Matthews<[hidden email]> wrote:
> stevertigo wrote:

> Can you not do this thing of bad-mouthing people who disagree with you?
> (See your attitude to Cary Bass.)

How have I bad-mouthed anyone? My "attitude" toward Cary has actually
been quite positive - before I ever tried to communicate with him, I
had already imparted to him such human qualities as a bright and an
outgoing personality, and a fair and balanced approach to new
concepts.  Hence when I made my plain and open request - via wikein,
mediazilla, and a private email - I had no doubt that we would soon
get a response from him. I was simply expressing my disappointment in
how things turned out, and in fact I attribute his lack of
responsiveness not to him, personally, but to whatever
behind-the-scenes artifices may be constricting his degrees of motion
and general sense of freedom.

> I seem to remember a thread with a very different feel. You had some support from Fred Bauder, who likes
> the idea of discussing dispute resolution.

Fred's an intelligent being, and when I'm not deliberately pouring
fuel on the fire - he might even agree with me. He understands this is
an open project, and that in all but a few special cases, its issues
that are best discussed openly. Pretty simple, actually.

> You had very definite opposition from me. You can call me sub-articulate all you like, but I
> don't think it will stick.

I would never call you sub-articulate, Charles. In fact you are one of
the most articulate people I've ever dealt with.  However, with that
said, as I recall in this case you just didn't have much of a point to
make other than you didn't like it. I would not say this means that
you were sub-artculate, personally, but rather that your posting on
the matter lacked the substantive and articulated argument we've
generally come to expect from you.

> And my point is that your broad brush means the second sentence would
> self-contradict, in a welter of meddling and advocacy. If that's the
> intended remit (everything up to and including the kitchen sink) then
> there was no misunderstanding at all about the scope.

I don't see the contradiction. A large part of 'being helpful' is in
fact just being open and available. If a private, closed, proprietary
system thinks that openness is unhelpful, then the fates usually
demand that such system get retooled.

I understand that you were Arbcom for a while, and you might suspect
that resolution-l would just be a forum by which I could lambaste
Arbcom, inline with the points I have been making recently about its
lack of openness and responsiveness - concepts made clear in the
WP:RFAR/OAR case.

The real point here is that we don't need to get into that territory
too much more, if we establish an open forum - not a closed one, mind
you - at resolution-l.

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:52 AM, stevertigo<[hidden email]> wrote:

Previous post correction diff:
- its issues that are best discussed openly.
+ its issues are best discussed openly.

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 9:44 AM, stevertigo<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Keep in mind you are making the same misconceptions that Thomas did.
> The resolution-l forum is not for getting into details about how to
> handle

Should be "how to handle.. specific on-wiki disputes/conflicts."

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Cary Bass-4
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

stevertigo wrote:

> I'm proposing that we start a resolution-l mailing list.
>
> Yes, I know we talked about it a month ago, to the tune of about
> 100 posts, and it seemed that it wasn't going anywhere. But that
> was just appearances. The reality is that the support was
> substantial, the opposition was sub-articulate, and whatever
> substantive criticism there was was largely based in some assumed
> misconceptions about its scope (Thomas).
>
> The real truth is that we have been waiting for Cary to fulfill one
> of his many duties and create the list. That having failed, we have
> been waiting on Cary to tell us why he has not. That also having
> failed, we instead have just been waiting a month for Cary to say
> anything at all. And he recently did, though there was little
> substance in it, other than a threat to close the bug request.
> Which in fact, he just did close as WONTFIX:
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19414 . I'm sure he
> thinks he's doing the right thing. Still, despite our recent
> differences, we should welcome Cary's actual participation in our
> discussion. Thank you Cary, we understand that you were just too
> busy to give this proper consideration.
>
I did give it proper consideration. I apologize for treating you
special and not having responded to you directly. Most people give
bugzilla's requests as well as emails to the respondent some time to
respond before they post allegations about the person responsible to
foundation-l. Apparently you felt this had a higher priority than I
did, although you could not find anyone to agree with you, which is
why you posted to foundaiton-l, and you could not find anyone to agree
with you there either, and further got yourself banned from that list
for perpetually bringing it up.

I would suggest you stop creating a controversy where there is none by
posting unsubstantiated insinuations about me on a public mailing list
which is archived and googled by using poisonous language such as "And
he recently did, though there was little substance in it," which
inherently fail to endear me to your cause any further.

- --
Cary Bass
Volunteer Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkpvTOUACgkQyQg4JSymDYl3MACgyXbk5SQdJKtj7OOuJkRWiM/N
qWkAoM276pysFvzeZVK0mGsM1lM6E7gV
=10iW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
2009/7/28 stevertigo <[hidden email]>:
> The real truth is that we have been waiting for Cary to fulfill one of
> his many duties and create the list. That having failed, we have been
> waiting on Cary to tell us why he has not. [snip]

Who is this "we"? While a small number of people (I would estimate a
minority, although I haven't counted) have expressed some vague
support for your idea, I think you are the only person with any real
interest in it. I don't think anyone else has been waiting.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Cary Bass-4
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

stevertigo wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Charles
> Matthews<[hidden email]> wrote:
>> stevertigo wrote:
>
>> Can you not do this thing of bad-mouthing people who disagree
>> with you? (See your attitude to Cary Bass.)
>
> How have I bad-mouthed anyone? My "attitude" toward Cary has
> actually been quite positive - before I ever tried to communicate
> with him, I had already imparted to him such human qualities as a
> bright and an outgoing personality, and a fair and balanced
> approach to new concepts. Hence when I made my plain and open
> request - via wikein, mediazilla, and a private email - I had no
> doubt that we would soon get a response from him. I was simply
> expressing my disappointment in how things turned out, and in fact
> I attribute his lack of responsiveness not to him, personally, but
> to whatever behind-the-scenes artifices may be constricting his
> degrees of motion and general sense of freedom.

Perhaps you should take a moment, and replace every instance in the
emails you are sending to the list of "Cary Bass" to "Stevertigo" to
determine out exactly how positive and fair your comments have been.

What the worst thing is, that I've been now forced by your comments to
take the time to respond to you on email lists rather than working on
substantially more important and valuable uses of the time that the
Foundation expects of me.

This will be the last email I have on this topic. I'm going to be
setting my wikien-l list to "nomail" for the time being so I can get
useful work done.
- --
Cary Bass
Volunteer Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkpvTuwACgkQyQg4JSymDYmEbgCfS7vvHOwO7I381CnveCkX6mT4
HAUAn0ftehwqheOwACKzKptKm5Gkl14m
=wNke
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Charles Matthews
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
stevertigo wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Charles
> Matthews<[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>  
>> Can you not do this thing of bad-mouthing people who disagree with you?
>> (See your attitude to Cary Bass.)
>>    
>
> How have I bad-mouthed anyone?
*Splutter.*

>> You had very definite opposition from me. You can call me sub-articulate all you like, but I
>> don't think it will stick.
>>    
>
> I would never call you sub-articulate, Charles. In fact you are one of
> the most articulate people I've ever dealt with.  However, with that
> said, as I recall in this case you just didn't have much of a point to
> make other than you didn't like it.
You do not recall correctly, then. Why not review the thread?
>  I would not say this means that
> you were sub-artculate, personally, but rather that your posting on
> the matter lacked the substantive and articulated argument we've
> generally come to expect from you.
>  
See my earlier comment(s).

> I understand that you were Arbcom for a while, and you might suspect
> that resolution-l would just be a forum by which I could lambaste
> Arbcom, inline with the points I have been making recently about its
> lack of openness and responsiveness - concepts made clear in the
> WP:RFAR/OAR case.
>  
Considering that Arbitrators regularly get hounded on their talk pages,
and are subject to pile-ons in just about any forum, this is not my
particular concern. The heat in the kitchen probably deters a fair
number of likely candidates from coming forward to serve on the ArbCom;
but this list wouldn't change that very much. I think you might suspect
that three years of reading the Arbcom mail might convey some notions of
the limitations of mailing lists, as well as the limitations of the ArbCom.

The point, sir, is that your approach is very clearly one of escalation,
and forcing the issue, while clad in personal attack. This is
diametrically opposite to all sane versions of dispute resolution. It
actually does do something to discredit your idea.

(It is is shame that I used the joke about hiring [[Malcolm McLaren]] as
a babysitter on another occasion. Perhaps I should just pretend it is
freshly minted.)

Charles




_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by Cary Bass-4
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Cary Bass<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I did give it proper consideration.

Um, no. You didn't.  'Proper consideration' requires sending signals
out to people and getting some signals back - responsiveness.

>  I apologize for treating you special and not having responded to you directly.

Ah, the special treatment.

> Most people give bugzilla's requests as well as emails to the respondent some time to
> respond before they post allegations about the person responsible to
> foundation-l.

Ah, yes the timeliness issue. Next time don't make people wait a month
for a simple straightforward email response: a simple 'people whom
I've talked in private say its a bad idea' would have been a quite
ample response, if given in timely fashion.

> Apparently you felt this had a higher priority than I did

Yes, that is the nature of other people's ideas - they naturally will
consider such more important, urgent, or resonant than some official
might do.

> although you could not find anyone to agree with you

Actually not true. Fred and George I can think of off-hand. And
Thomas, after we worked through most of his critiques, probably is in
90-95 in agreement with my exact concept. And this is not to say the
concept can't be amended, streamlined, or altered a bit via
intelligent criticism of a similar kind.

> which is why you posted to foundaiton-l, and you could not find anyone to agree with you there either

The issue with posting to foundation-l was just to get your attention.
You are the sole person in charge of creating new lists, aren't you?
Perhaps this is a mistake. Perhaps your duties in the real world do
not permit you to give due consideration to on-wiki matters anymore.

> and further got yourself banned from that list for perpetually bringing it up.

Yes, I know about the "banning." Still in effect, actually.

> I would suggest you stop creating a controversy where there is none

The only thing controversial here is that you are supposedly the go-to
guy for creating new lists, and yet you didn't bother to respond to
the 100 message wikien-l thread, a mediazilla request, and a private
email, for almost a month.  You are obviously capable and qualified in
a great many areas, but are likewise just to overworked and busy to
give sufficient attention to that particular matter.

> by posting unsubstantiated insinuations about me

I made no insinuations. I made it clear that you just weren't doing your job.

> on a public mailing list which is archived and googled by using poisonous language

We all once had reasonably thick skins here on wikien-l. What happened?

> such as "And he recently did, though there was little substance in it,"

True. You decried my singling you out, decried my criticizing of your
inaction, claimed there was zero support for it, noted that certain
invisible people on functionaries-l disliked the idea, and stated only
that you would close the thread after just one more day.

> inherently fail to endear me to your cause any further.

I understand that by criticizing your inaction and unresponsiveness, I
have singled you out, and thus have made you less than eager to start
being helpful. The point here of course, is that you should have been
eager and helpful from the get-go, and not entirely silent and
unresponsive.

I have made my criticism broader than just you though, to include all
privatized communication, as I know how these work over time to erode
general openness, transparency and other core principles and values.

With that out of the way, I greatly appreciate the apology, Cary.  I
know you mean it.  Likewise please accept my apology for singling you
out, when I know others are just as responsible. We can get on now
with discussing the substance of the proposal, and I would greatly
appreciate your participation.

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Thomas Dalton
2009/7/28 stevertigo <[hidden email]>:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Cary Bass<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I did give it proper consideration.
>
> Um, no. You didn't.  'Proper consideration' requires sending signals
> out to people and getting some signals back - responsiveness.

It is the job of the proposer to demonstrate consensus. That has been
how it has worked for as long as I've been around.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Thomas Dalton<[hidden email]> wrote:

> It is the job of the proposer to demonstrate consensus. That has been
> how it has worked for as long as I've been around.

Hm. Is it then the job then of the officials to decree "there is no consensus?"

Strange, and anyways untrue: Consensus is achieved, not demonstrated.

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Thomas Dalton
2009/7/28 stevertigo <[hidden email]>:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Thomas Dalton<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> It is the job of the proposer to demonstrate consensus. That has been
>> how it has worked for as long as I've been around.
>
> Hm. Is it then the job then of the officials to decree "there is no consensus?"
>
> Strange, and anyways untrue: Consensus is achieved, not demonstrated.

You have to demonstrate that it has been achieved, usually be giving a
link to the discussion where (almost) everyone was in agreement. All
you had was a mailing list thread where not many people agreed and
very few people participated at all.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Charles
Matthews<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Considering that Arbitrators regularly get hounded on their talk pages,
> and are subject to pile-ons in just about any forum, this is not my
> particular concern. The heat in the kitchen probably deters a fair
> number of likely candidates from coming forward to serve on the ArbCom;
> but this list wouldn't change that very much. I think you might suspect
> that three years of reading the Arbcom mail might convey some notions of
> the limitations of mailing lists, as well as the limitations of the ArbCom.

Well, Jimbo dealt with the same thing a few years ago, and in reality
the only issue was that he was trying to do too much. That's why I
stated in as blunt terms as possible that he needed to let go of his
baby, develop a core of trusted editors and empower them to deal with
things.

It's worked out swimmingly. The only issue then is that these other
beings seem to lack Jimbo's straightforward and personal approach. As
I've said a hundred times, Arbcom they are too overworked - and just
as overburdened in their own ways as Jimbo once was.  Begin phase
three.

> The point, sir, is that your approach is very clearly one of escalation,
> and forcing the issue, while clad in personal attack. This is
> diametrically opposite to all sane versions of dispute resolution. It
> actually does do something to discredit your idea.

Ah, so you have a point after all, sir. I don't understand how this is
all supposedly about some kind of personal attack. Clarification, sir,
if you please. And I am not really "forcing" the issue - just getting
the road cleared is all. What is "diametrically opposed to all sane
versions of dispute resolution?" The proposed resolution-l list? This
discussion? If you could define the above, perhaps what "it" is would
be clear, such that I would then know what "something" it "actually
does.. to discredit [my] idea."

> (It is is shame that I used the joke about hiring [[Malcolm McLaren]] as
> a babysitter on another occasion. Perhaps I should just pretend it is
> freshly minted.)

Shame indeed, and anyway I don't get the joke.  By the way, why is
[[McLaren]] an article about some sodding racing car outfit, and not a
proper surname disambiguation?

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Thomas Dalton<[hidden email]> wrote:

> You have to demonstrate that it has been achieved, usually be giving a
> link to the discussion where (almost) everyone was in agreement. All
> you had was a mailing list thread where not many people agreed and
> very few people participated at all.

Ah. Just looking through the list of current mailing lists:
Checkuser-l, functionaries-l, arbitration-l (sic), mediation-l (sic),
accounts-en-l, OTRS-en-l (also de, fr, etc.) - quite a few private
lists, actually, for such an open project.

I also note lists like daily-image-l and daily-article-l etc. - spam
basically.  Greenspun? 25K was enough to get someone's name as a
project and mailing list title? Doesn't look really resonant with the
illustrators, either.

I get the picture, and if there were a relevant substantive point to
be made here it would be something like 'There cannot be a
resolution-l mailing list, regardless of how well-purposed and useful
it will be, simply because we already have so many useless mailing
lists, as well as private ones that people don't have access to.

And am I to understand that all of these have been vetted in accord
with the same process you promote? Hm. Links, please.

-Stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l

Thomas Dalton
2009/7/28 stevertigo <[hidden email]>:

> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Thomas Dalton<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> You have to demonstrate that it has been achieved, usually be giving a
>> link to the discussion where (almost) everyone was in agreement. All
>> you had was a mailing list thread where not many people agreed and
>> very few people participated at all.
>
> Ah. Just looking through the list of current mailing lists:
> Checkuser-l, functionaries-l, arbitration-l (sic), mediation-l (sic),
> accounts-en-l, OTRS-en-l (also de, fr, etc.) - quite a few private
> lists, actually, for such an open project.
>
> I also note lists like daily-image-l and daily-article-l etc. - spam
> basically.  Greenspun? 25K was enough to get someone's name as a
> project and mailing list title? Doesn't look really resonant with the
> illustrators, either.
>
> I get the picture, and if there were a relevant substantive point to
> be made here it would be something like 'There cannot be a
> resolution-l mailing list, regardless of how well-purposed and useful
> it will be, simply because we already have so many useless mailing
> lists, as well as private ones that people don't have access to.

Would you like a match to set light to that straw man?

> And am I to understand that all of these have been vetted in accord
> with the same process you promote? Hm. Links, please.

Several of those were decreed by Jimbo, that is an exception to the
usual rule. Some were created unilaterally by the WMF, also an
exception. Proposals that come from the community, like yours, require
consensus.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
123