Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Ryan Lane-2
> What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
>

I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
phrase this.

I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
discouraging people from acting this way.

- Ryan

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

MZMcBride-2
Ryan Lane wrote:
>> What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
>
> I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
> phrase this.
>
> I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
> think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
> discouraging people from acting this way.

What would have been a politer way to phrase the question? I originally
wrote "when are you going to clean up the mess you made?", but I rewrote it.

The answer can be as simple as "apologize and move on." It's a little
unclear to me what the extent of the damage is, but I don't think it's
unreasonable if someone actively breaks something to expect them to deal
with (or at least mitigate) the consequences, particularly if it's within
their power to do so. I hit this issue at
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Deprecating_inline_styles> before it
was mentioned on the mailing list. I read Daniel's reply as "shit happens"
(which is a perfectly acceptable response sometimes). But given the open
editing nature of the sites primarily affected and the fact that the sites
track external link usage, I'm not sure it's out-of-line to suggest that the
person (or people) who made the mess of the links clean it up. If it was
out-of-line, I apologize.

Regarding an acceptable behavior policy, what did you have in mind?

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Brandon Harris-4

On Aug 16, 2012, at 7:18 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Ryan Lane wrote:
>>> What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
>>
>> I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
>> phrase this.
>>
>> I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
>> think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
>> discouraging people from acting this way.
>
> What would have been a politer way to phrase the question? I originally
> wrote "when are you going to clean up the mess you made?", but I rewrote it.


        "the mess you made".

        Right there, in that phrase, you have aggressively indicated the following:

                a) That you believe someone fucked up;
                b) That you think they're incompetent;
                c) That you think they're being lazy about it

        None of that is helpful.

        This communication style typically causes the exact opposite response from what you apparently want to have happen.  I can't speak for others, but when someone talks to *me* this way, I start tuning them out.

        Honey = flies.  

---
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Tyler Romeo
This is (hopefully) a community. When somebody fucks something up, they own
up to it and somebody fixes it (sometimes the person who did it fixes it,
sometimes somebody else). The proper way to phrase it would have been "So
how can we go about fixing this?". By saying that you're not putting one
person on the spot.

As far as an acceptable policy, how about just don't be a
dick<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_a_dick>
?

*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | [hidden email]



On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Brandon Harris <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
> On Aug 16, 2012, at 7:18 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Ryan Lane wrote:
> >>> What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
> >>
> >> I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
> >> phrase this.
> >>
> >> I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
> >> think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
> >> discouraging people from acting this way.
> >
> > What would have been a politer way to phrase the question? I originally
> > wrote "when are you going to clean up the mess you made?", but I rewrote
> it.
>
>
>         "the mess you made".
>
>         Right there, in that phrase, you have aggressively indicated the
> following:
>
>                 a) That you believe someone fucked up;
>                 b) That you think they're incompetent;
>                 c) That you think they're being lazy about it
>
>         None of that is helpful.
>
>         This communication style typically causes the exact opposite
> response from what you apparently want to have happen.  I can't speak for
> others, but when someone talks to *me* this way, I start tuning them out.
>
>         Honey = flies.
>
> ---
> Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Brandon Harris-4
Brandon Harris wrote:

> On Aug 16, 2012, at 7:18 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Ryan Lane wrote:
>>>> What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
>>>
>>> I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
>>> phrase this.
>>>
>>> I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
>>> think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
>>> discouraging people from acting this way.
>>
>> What would have been a politer way to phrase the question? I originally
>> wrote "when are you going to clean up the mess you made?", but I rewrote it.
>
> "the mess you made".
>
> Right there, in that phrase, you have aggressively indicated the following:
>
> a) That you believe someone fucked up;
> b) That you think they're incompetent;
> c) That you think they're being lazy about it

I didn't intend to indicate most of that, of course. That said, system
administrators are trusted to not break things and when they do, there's a
moral obligation to make a good-faith effort to fix that which was broken by
their actions. In this case, the moral culpability equation is enhanced by
various factors previously discussed.

> This communication style typically causes the exact opposite response from
> what you apparently want to have happen.  I can't speak for others, but when
> someone talks to *me* this way, I start tuning them out.

Sure. But to me the tone is mostly irrelevant when you're considering a
question of morality and ethics. If I break something, I feel obligated to
make a good-faith effort to clean up the mess from my actions. I don't care
if I'm the only one who noticed or if fifty people have noticed and are now
shouting about it. I'll agree that we can't expect anyone to be able to
fully rectify the ripple effects of breaking links like this. Perhaps others
don't feel similarly about the level of moral culpability, and I can accept
that, I just don't happen to agree that such behavior (making a mess and
then simply walking away) is acceptable in this case.

(It may seem strange to discuss moral culpability in the context of
something seemingly so trivial, but when you consider the weighty issues of
manipulating a historical record and the level of access and trust required
to do so, it makes sense, in my opinion.)

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Federico Leva (Nemo)
In reply to this post by Tyler Romeo
Tyler is right. So let's be positive and read that "what's your plan" as
a generic you, a question to the audience/community, and get the issue
fixed all together. I made my proposal/question/suggestion, it's the
best I can.

Alternatively, of course we could as well spend our energies in throwing
policy-bricks to each other; the designated place would probably be
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines> (page created
after some Internal-l quarrels I believe).

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by Ryan Lane-2
On 17 August 2012 02:42, Ryan Lane <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
>>
>
> I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
> phrase this.
>
> I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
> think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
> discouraging people from acting this way.

It's a *slightly* rude way to phrase it. It's important not to overreact.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Faidon Liambotis
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 07:05:24AM -0400, MZMcBride wrote:

> > "the mess you made".
> >
> > Right there, in that phrase, you have aggressively indicated the following:
> >
> > a) That you believe someone fucked up;
> > b) That you think they're incompetent;
> > c) That you think they're being lazy about it
>
> I didn't intend to indicate most of that, of course. That said, system
> administrators are trusted to not break things and when they do, there's a
> moral obligation to make a good-faith effort to fix that which was broken by
> their actions. In this case, the moral culpability equation is enhanced by
> various factors previously discussed.

I've been silent because others seemed to handle it. But I can't
anymore. Your initial mail was disturbing enough. Your complete lack of
understanding of what multiple people are saying to you and the lack of
an apology are even worse.

Your words hurt people, created a bad precedent of aggressive behavior
and are counter-productive. Please stop this.

Regards,
Faidon

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Michel Vuijlsteke-2
On 17 August 2012 14:22, Faidon Liambotis <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 07:05:24AM -0400, MZMcBride wrote:
> > > "the mess you made".
> > >
> > > Right there, in that phrase, you have aggressively indicated the
> following:
> >
> > I didn't intend to indicate most of that, of course. That said, system
>
> I've been silent because others seemed to handle it. But I can't
> anymore. Your initial mail was disturbing enough. Your complete lack of
> understanding of what multiple people are saying to you and the lack of
> an apology are even worse.
>
> Your words hurt people, created a bad precedent of aggressive behavior
> and are counter-productive. Please stop this.


I think it's important to keep things in perspective, and not to overreact.

What seems to have happened here, is that one action has broken many (all?)
links to Mailman archives. That, in my book, is a mess. The question was,
to that someone who made the mess, what his plan was to clean it up.

What should happen right now is *cleaning up the mess*. The more time is
spent in butthurt and drama, the more *new* mess there is to clean up, once
the old mess is cleaned up.

As far as I can see the easiest wat to go about this, is to dig up backups,
salt the messages that originally needed to be "deleted" with spaces or ***
or whatever (and add a note to the effect of "this was done because of
*reason*), and then rebuild the archives so the permalinks are not broken
anymore.

And then go in and fix whatever permalinks were fixed in the meantime.

This needs to happen fast. Once it's been done, there's all the time in the
world for recriminations and drama and new guidelines and rules of conduct
and whatnot.

Michel
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Daniel Zahn-2
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:05 AM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> that, I just don't happen to agree that such behavior (making a mess and
> then simply walking away) is acceptable in this case.

- I already apologized for breaking links and yes, it was a mistake to
not just replace ALL messages in that thread with XXXs
- It's not like i just wanted to mess with archives for fun, there
have been serious requests by others do remove stuff.
- I warned about broken links myself before, there is a trail for this on RT
- I did not "simply walk away" unless you are expecting me to work in
the middle of the night. I just got to read all your replies and the
suggestion to reinsert messages and i am looking at it right now.
- I have never been declared the "mailman-guy", i simply picked up
tickets nobody else had taken trying to help.

--
Daniel Zahn <[hidden email]>
Operations Engineer

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Mark Holmquist-2
> - I warned about broken links myself before, there is a trail for this on RT

All other opinions aside, this isn't good enough for a public list--RT
tickets aren't public. I don't even have an account there. Some public
posting (to the list, on a wiki somewhere) would be much better.

That said, I'm not overly irritated. There are a few links I need to
update, but that's doable. Thanks for handling this issue, and for being
responsive to the concerns raised.

--
Mark Holmquist
Contractor, Wikimedia Foundation
[hidden email]
http://marktraceur.info

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Ryan Lane-2
In reply to this post by Michel Vuijlsteke-2
> I think it's important to keep things in perspective, and not to overreact.
>

If you were treated this way consistently by someone, and the
community defended that person rather than calling them out on their
poor behavior, would you continue to volunteer? Do you expect staff to
continue working under the same conditions?

Best case you'll get is staff members that tune out the jerks. Of
course, when the prevailing culture breeds this type of behavior,
you'll get lots of staff tuning out lots of jerks. It isn't a viable
community.

> What seems to have happened here, is that one action has broken many (all?)
> links to Mailman archives. That, in my book, is a mess. The question was,
> to that someone who made the mess, what his plan was to clean it up.
>

Again with the phrasing. Cut it out.

You realize that Daniel is the only person who's deleted posts that
has even given the slightest care to the fact that the links break,
right? This happens all the time and until today we just broke the
links.

If you really want to fix this problem, fix mailman, or write a sane system.

> What should happen right now is *cleaning up the mess*. The more time is
> spent in butthurt and drama, the more *new* mess there is to clean up, once
> the old mess is cleaned up.
>

This thread is about the culture of aggressive behavior that we breed
and accept. I'm tired of accepting it. As I called out MZ, I'm going
to call you out too. Your behavior in this post is unacceptable.

> As far as I can see the easiest wat to go about this, is to dig up backups,
> salt the messages that originally needed to be "deleted" with spaces or ***
> or whatever (and add a note to the effect of "this was done because of
> *reason*), and then rebuild the archives so the permalinks are not broken
> anymore.
>
> And then go in and fix whatever permalinks were fixed in the meantime.
>
> This needs to happen fast. Once it's been done, there's all the time in the
> world for recriminations and drama and new guidelines and rules of conduct
> and whatnot.
>

Why does this matter so much? This is like the 27637862487 time that
links have been broken due to the exact same action. It isn't the end
of the world. It would be ideal if it was repaired, but it's not a
dire emergency.

- Ryan

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Derric Atzrott
Comments inline.

> > I think it's important to keep things in perspective, and not to
overreact.
> >
>
> If you were treated this way consistently by someone, and the community
> defended that person rather than calling them out on their poor behavior,
would
> you continue to volunteer? Do you expect staff to continue working under
the
> same conditions?
>
> Best case you'll get is staff members that tune out the jerks. Of course,
when
> the prevailing culture breeds this type of behavior, you'll get lots of
staff
> tuning out lots of jerks. It isn't a viable community.
>

Before I begin with anything else, let me say that I am not defending anyone
here.  This message is meant to state an honest opinion on a matter that
will
likely affect all of us on this mailing list due to its nature, and the
nature
of this discussion.

With that in mind.  I do agree that this entire thing has gotten out of
perspective.  While I don't agree with the actions that prompted this (sorry
MZ
I can't back you up here, although I do get where you're coming from), I
also
think that the fact that I even felt the need to write this email, or for
that
matter write this email in the careful fashion I am doing it in, shows that
the situation has been blown out of perspective.

> > What seems to have happened here, is that one action has broken many
> > (all?) links to Mailman archives. That, in my book, is a mess. The
> > question was, to that someone who made the mess, what his plan was to
clean
> > it up.
> >
>
> Again with the phrasing. Cut it out.

Agreed.  I'm not sure if anyone else read the previously linked to article
on
not being a dick, but it actually talks about this.  Just because something
is
right, does not make it not dickish.

Quick Note: I've not been on the list for long enough to know whether or
not MZ is consistantly a dick, but I tend to assume good faith in that he
was
probably just being a dick this time.  Same thing with Michel, who for the
most
part did not post a dickish message and in fact I would go so far as to say
that Michel probably would rather see this whole discussion done and
overwith
so we can get back to the good stuff than anything else.  I could be wrong,
but
that was the impression his email gave me at least.

>
> You realize that Daniel is the only person who's deleted posts that has
even
> given the slightest care to the fact that the links break, right? This
happens
> all the time and until today we just broke the links.
>
> If you really want to fix this problem, fix mailman, or write a sane
system.
>

Although I agree that this is probably the direction we need to head, right
now
our problem is the links as they are.  When your car breaks down you don't
say,
"If you really want to fix this problem, design a new car."  Instead you go
to
the repair shop, get your car fixed so you can move on with your life, and
if
the car has been consistantly an issue for a while now, after it is fixed
you
go about designing a new car (assuming you have the skill set required to do
so).

With that in mind.  I agree that Daniel should be commended for his work.  I
also think that a mess was made and needs cleaned up.  I ''also'' think that
a better system needs to be implemented or designed to keep this from
happening
again.  So in this regard I think everyone is right.

> > What should happen right now is *cleaning up the mess*. The more time
> > is spent in butthurt and drama, the more *new* mess there is to clean
> > up, once the old mess is cleaned up.
> >
>
> This thread is about the culture of aggressive behavior that we breed and
> accept. I'm tired of accepting it. As I called out MZ, I'm going to call
you
> out too. Your behavior in this post is unacceptable.
>

I've no comment here.  That is your personal opinion and I have no place
intruding on it.

> > As far as I can see the easiest wat to go about this, is to dig up
> > backups, salt the messages that originally needed to be "deleted" with
> > spaces or *** or whatever (and add a note to the effect of "this was
> > done because of *reason*), and then rebuild the archives so the
> > permalinks are not broken anymore.
> >
> > And then go in and fix whatever permalinks were fixed in the meantime.
> >
> > This needs to happen fast. Once it's been done, there's all the time
> > in the world for recriminations and drama and new guidelines and rules
> > of conduct and whatnot.
> >
>
> Why does this matter so much? This is like the 27637862487 time that links
have
> been broken due to the exact same action. It isn't the end of the world.
It
> would be ideal if it was repaired, but it's not a dire emergency.
>
> - Ryan

Agreed.  The issue is not time senstative, although it would be better to be
fixed sooner than later.  Its more like you lost your favourite book than
you
lost your rent money.  The world won't end from this problem, but it will
make
things inconvient for others down the line.  Would a medium priority perhaps
be a good compromise?

Also I think that Michel's solution to fix the problem is a good idea.  I
can't
see any downsides to restoring a backup, blanking the messages, and then
fixing
the previously fixed links.  With that in mind, I wouldn't blame Daniel if
he
didn't want to do it.  I know I wouldn't want to go through that effort if I
found myself caught in the middle of this.

Hopefully all of these issues can be solved in a relaxed, calm, and
effective
manner.  I would like to re-iterate that this post is not meant to offend,
blame, or condemn anyone.  Furthermore this post is not meant to be dickish
and
I appologise ahead of time if it is, or anyone construes it as such.  I am
merely attempting to act as an uninterested third party, as I have no real
interest in the mailing list archive, nor do I really know Daniel; Michel;
or
Ryan, who can help mediate the situation.

Sorry for the long email all.

Thank you,
Derric Atzrott
Computer Specialist
Alizee Pathology


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Federico Leva (Nemo)
In reply to this post by Ryan Lane-2
«This is like the 27637862487 time that links have been broken due to
the exact same action.» I can bear hyperboles but this is a bit
excessive, and looks like just another attempt to make this flame
bigger: I hope the reality is closer to "two or three times in the past
couple of years", and that in any case list owners have been warned.
In fact, to compensate such hyperboles, I can't help noting that
<https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/Remove_a_message_from_mailing_list_archive>,
which I already linked, exists since 2005 and that I assume it's not
completely out of everyone's radar.

Adding to what has been said elsewhere in this thread, what needs fixing
is this section:
<https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/Remove_a_message_from_mailing_list_archive#Considerations_for_requesters>.
We should have clear rules (you could just make that advice policy
maybe?) and someone responsible for the process.
It's obviously not fair to expect someone to pick up these tasks in
their overtime, if one wants the process to be reliable (ie timely,
policy-compliant and technically correct/non-disruptive).

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Daniel Zahn-2
Daniel Zahn wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:05 AM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> that, I just don't happen to agree that such behavior (making a mess and
>> then simply walking away) is acceptable in this case.
>
> - I already apologized for breaking links and yes, it was a mistake to
> not just replace ALL messages in that thread with XXXs
> - It's not like i just wanted to mess with archives for fun, there
> have been serious requests by others do remove stuff.
> - I warned about broken links myself before, there is a trail for this on RT
> - I did not "simply walk away" unless you are expecting me to work in
> the middle of the night. I just got to read all your replies and the
> suggestion to reinsert messages and i am looking at it right now.

Hi.

I've always found you to be incredibly helpful on IRC, on the mailing lists,
and elsewhere and I've always appreciated having you around. I apologize if
my initial message suggested otherwise.

I read your reply to Guillom's post as "shit happens." And it most certainly
does. But you said that the archives were last rebuilt two weeks ago, which
is where the timeline kind of fell apart in my head. There was no
communication to the list and its members and the archive being rebuilt two
weeks ago and the consequences of doing so. It took several people noticing
and then someone sending a message to the list to get an acknowledgement
that the archive rebuild had even taken place. I found this very
off-putting.

Mailing lists are _hugely important_ to the Wikimedia community. I hate
Mailman as much as anyone, but for historical, technical, and privacy
reasons, mailing lists continue to be _hugely important_. With wikitech-l in
particular, Gerrit, CodeReview, Bugzilla, wikitech.wikimedia.org, and
hundreds of wikis all rely on a somewhat sane and stable system for linking
to particular messages in the wikitech-l archive. I personally consult the
wikitech-l archives regularly as do many others.

The link breakage sucks, but it's not my primary concern at this point. My
primary concern is that the archive now appears to be corrupt. Messages have
apparently gone missing from years ago (e.g., the Tim Starling Day
announcement from October 31, 2003) and there are artifacts of messages now
erroneously appearing in the August 2012 archive (31 messages with the
subject line "No subject"). Is it possible for someone to take a look at
this corruption and assess what can be done to fix it?

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Ryan Lane-2
In reply to this post by Federico Leva (Nemo)
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> «This is like the 27637862487 time that links have been broken due to the
> exact same action.» I can bear hyperboles but this is a bit excessive, and
> looks like just another attempt to make this flame bigger: I hope the
> reality is closer to "two or three times in the past couple of years", and
> that in any case list owners have been warned.
> In fact, to compensate such hyperboles, I can't help noting that
> <https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/Remove_a_message_from_mailing_list_archive>,
> which I already linked, exists since 2005 and that I assume it's not
> completely out of everyone's radar.
>

It was meant to be an exaggeration. It has happened a number of times
in the past. It may happen again in the future. Mistakes happen and
they are especially noticeable when it's ops that makes the mistake.

> Adding to what has been said elsewhere in this thread, what needs fixing is
> this section:
> <https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/Remove_a_message_from_mailing_list_archive#Considerations_for_requesters>.
> We should have clear rules (you could just make that advice policy maybe?)
> and someone responsible for the process.
> It's obviously not fair to expect someone to pick up these tasks in their
> overtime, if one wants the process to be reliable (ie timely,
> policy-compliant and technically correct/non-disruptive).
>

Yep. As mentioned, we're going to make the procedures clearer to avoid
this situation in the future.

Having someone responsible for the process is unlikely. I'd be
surprised if anyone on the ops team works less than 60 hours a week.
No matter who does this, it's going to be as a side-task to their
normal responsibilities. That's unavoidable.

- Ryan

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Ryan Lane-2
Ryan Lane wrote:
>> What seems to have happened here, is that one action has broken many (all?)
>> links to Mailman archives. That, in my book, is a mess. The question was,
>> to that someone who made the mess, what his plan was to clean it up.
>
> Again with the phrasing. Cut it out.

Sincerely, I'm still a little unclear what phrasing you object to here. Just
to be perfectly clear, it's the use of the word "mess," right? If so, I can
make note not to use that word going forward on this list.

It may be a regional thing, but where I'm from, when a lot of things get
broken, it's considered a mess. In this case, a lot of links were broken, so
I described the situation as a mess. If there are better words to use to
describe the situation or words you'd prefer I use, please let me know.

> You realize that Daniel is the only person who's deleted posts that
> has even given the slightest care to the fact that the links break,
> right? This happens all the time and until today we just broke the
> links.

I don't believe this is true. As Guillaume said in the opening post, these
links have been stable for years. Can you provide links or some other kind
of evidence that the archive links breaking in this way is a regular
occurrence? I know of one other time that this has happened, but you're
suggesting that it happens frequently. I don't believe there is any evidence
to support this claim.

> This thread is about the culture of aggressive behavior that we breed
> and accept. I'm tired of accepting it.

Can you elaborate on this?

> Why does this matter so much? This is like the 27637862487 time that
> links have been broken due to the exact same action. It isn't the end
> of the world. It would be ideal if it was repaired, but it's not a
> dire emergency.

It matters because mailing lists are _hugely important_ to the Wikimedia
community and its operations. And again, I don't believe this has happened a
number of times previously. I know of it happening once before.

The links breaking sucks, but you're absolutely right that it isn't the end
of the world (and I don't think anyone has suggested it is). To me, the
apparent corruption of the archives is a much higher priority issue.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Ryan Lane-2
Ryan Lane wrote:
> Can we make an acceptable behavior policy?
>
> [...]
>  
> I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
> think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
> discouraging people from acting this way.

I've long advocated for adopting toolserver-l's mailing list etiquette
guideline on all Wikimedia mailing lists. It's available here:
<https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/Mailing_list_etiquette>.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy? (was: Re: Mailman archives broken?)

Ryan Lane-2
>> I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
>> think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
>> discouraging people from acting this way.
>
> I've long advocated for adopting toolserver-l's mailing list etiquette
> guideline on all Wikimedia mailing lists. It's available here:
> <https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/Mailing_list_etiquette>.
>

That guideline basically just says don't top post. It doesn't really
address aggressive, offensive or hostile behavior, which is something
we actually have a problem with. We have this problem on basically all
of our lists, so I'm not saying it's limited to this one.

- Ryan

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Can we make an acceptable behavior policy?

Steve Summit
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
MZMcBride wrote:
> Ryan Lane wrote:
>> Again with the phrasing. Cut it out.
>
> Sincerely, I'm still a little unclear what phrasing you object to here. Just
> to be perfectly clear, it's the use of the word "mess," right? If so, I can
> make note not to use that word going forward on this list.
>
> It may be a regional thing...

I think it's more of a cultural thing.

You've displayed two traits that I'd tend to associate with the
old Usenet culture:

1. A near-absolute reverence for doing things Right.  In the case
   of system administrative tasks, that means, Never Fuck Up the
   Data in a Lossy Way.  If you have to stay up all night to fix it,
   you stay up all night.

2. A willingness to avoid issues of delivery in communication,
   a predilection for calling a spade a spade.  If someone gets
   their feelings hurt by that kind of directness, it's their problem.

As someone who harbors both these traits myself, you have all my
sympathy.  But as someone who has badly insulted others, and who
has been badly insulted by others, the others in this thread have
all my sympathy, too.  (How's that for fence-sitting?)

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
12