Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

"antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies

 

 

Wikipedia foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


vam at fct

Jun 29, 2009, 5:35 PM

Post #1 of 8 (870 views)
Permalink
"antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies

Talking about antisocial... It's quite interesting what I experienced
in this very list.

I wasn't aware of the study published in the New Scientist until I
read about it here on the list, and appreciate the information very much.

Earlier this month I wrote about my perception of the same inadequate
behavior on the Portuguese Wikipedia and the adverse consequences
that might have. Not surprisingly I met a pretty derogatory comment
and plenty of silence. I certainly don't have the status of the New
Scientist. I also don't have, yet, any study to back up my observations.

Nevertheless I'm saddened by the undeniable evidence, that even on
this list it is easier to find displeasure than empathy, camaraderie,
not to mention friendship. As I was told: That doesn't really fly here.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


michaeldavid86 at comcast

Jun 29, 2009, 6:47 PM

Post #2 of 8 (821 views)
Permalink
Re: "antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies [In reply to]

on 6/29/09 8:35 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado at vam [at] fct wrote:

> Talking about antisocial... It's quite interesting what I experienced
> in this very list.
>
> I wasn't aware of the study published in the New Scientist until I
> read about it here on the list, and appreciate the information very much.
>
> Earlier this month I wrote about my perception of the same inadequate
> behavior on the Portuguese Wikipedia and the adverse consequences
> that might have. Not surprisingly I met a pretty derogatory comment
> and plenty of silence. I certainly don't have the status of the New
> Scientist. I also don't have, yet, any study to back up my observations.
>
> Nevertheless I'm saddened by the undeniable evidence, that even on
> this list it is easier to find displeasure than empathy, camaraderie,
> not to mention friendship. As I was told: That doesn't really fly here.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Virgilio A. P. Machado
>
You are not alone in your observations, Virgilio; more agree with you than
will admit. It is truly a sad state of affairs.

Marc Riddell


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


nawrich at gmail

Jun 29, 2009, 7:01 PM

Post #3 of 8 (824 views)
Permalink
Re: "antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies [In reply to]

The most significant problem, Virgilio, is that there isn't too much people
on this list can do. Unless and until problems become so clear that steward
or Foundation action are obviously called for, there is unlikely to be much
concrete action at all. Since we can't impose a solution to the problems
you've identified from afar, and most of us can neither verify these
problems nor participate in fixing them without speaking the language...
What else should we do?

You're right, though, that exchanges on this list aren't always very
friendly. Maybe because very few discussions are actually productive, and
outside of cooperative effort most friendly exchanges are more likely to be
taken off-list.

Nathan
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


steven.walling at gmail

Jun 29, 2009, 7:10 PM

Post #4 of 8 (821 views)
Permalink
Re: "antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies [In reply to]

1. You're wrong. Just today I myself received some kind words offlist, but
related to a thread. Just because you're not getting the air of friendliness
you desire (at this moment anyway), doesn't mean friendliness doesn't exist.

2. It's a mailing list for discussion and debate, not an outlet for personal
validation. If you don't like being debated and disagreed with, then don't
post your opinions on something. I personally find asking questions rather
than making statements tends to garner a gentler response, if you're in need
of one.

3. All mailing lists are at times more hostile than any real life
conversation. It's far from unique to Wikimedia lists, and I've seen
*far*more angry flame wars on other mailing lists. If it's a problem
of the
medium of mailing lists and not of Wikimedian culture, then there's nothing
we could change about our culture that would make a mailing list more
friendly. I for one see us as already going out of our way to try and be a
culture that welcomes open discussion free of insulting behavior.

Steven Walling

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Nathan <nawrich [at] gmail> wrote:

> The most significant problem, Virgilio, is that there isn't too much people
> on this list can do. Unless and until problems become so clear that steward
> or Foundation action are obviously called for, there is unlikely to be much
> concrete action at all. Since we can't impose a solution to the problems
> you've identified from afar, and most of us can neither verify these
> problems nor participate in fixing them without speaking the language...
> What else should we do?
>
> You're right, though, that exchanges on this list aren't always very
> friendly. Maybe because very few discussions are actually productive, and
> outside of cooperative effort most friendly exchanges are more likely to be
> taken off-list.
>
> Nathan
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Steven Walling | @StevenWalling
mobile: 360.606.2930
skype: stevenwalling
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


vam at fct

Jun 29, 2009, 8:29 PM

Post #5 of 8 (816 views)
Permalink
"antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies [In reply to]

Sometimes the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Thanks for the comments
from Marc, Nathan and Steven. I'm hurrying this response in an
attempt to keep the subject alive for a little longer and generate
some interest from others.

Marc, you comment is not very optimistic, but it was a great
incentive to do what I announced above. Hopefully others will be more
encouraged to voice their ideas about other matters, knowing they'll
find a friendly hear and some useful and very welcome feedback.

I'm glad to find Nathan in a better mood this time :-). Of course
language is a problem. This is indeed a very interesting problem that
I hope has a solution in the international wikipedian community. That
is also an obstacle to getting on greater detail in this list since
most of its members would not be able to verify and cross check that
information.

The Foundation can't afford to let a Wikipedia on some obscure
language (that is not the case of Portuguese) to run wild and be run
by some mob. At some time a flag will go up. What then? I could offer
some suggestions, but I was hoping that you all would come up with
some useful and tested procedures.

I'm afraid to have to admit that the lack of interest and advice that
I got, so far, covers both list and off-list. I wish that would
change, again not only for the present case, but what kind of message
is this sending to others? How sure can we all be that there aren't
or there would not be other cases in the future?

Quite frankly, I would rather be wrong (not a very palatable
prospect) but give others the assurance that their voices will be
heard, than letting them remember the story of this guy from
"somewhere" who blew the whistle and nobody cared.

Sincerely,

Virgilio A. P. Machado



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


saintonge at telus

Jun 29, 2009, 9:53 PM

Post #6 of 8 (810 views)
Permalink
Re: "antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies [In reply to]

Steven Walling wrote:
> 1. You're wrong. Just today I myself received some kind words offlist, but
> related to a thread. Just because you're not getting the air of friendliness
> you desire (at this moment anyway), doesn't mean friendliness doesn't exist.
>

Getting friendly words offlist, says nothing about the list. I'm sure
that we all are more friendly with some than with others, so there's
nothing unusual about private messages. It's much easier to say
something to someone privately; there is less risk of needing to defend
every point that you are raising, less risk that some detail might be
taken adversarially.
> 2. It's a mailing list for discussion and debate, not an outlet for personal
> validation. If you don't like being debated and disagreed with, then don't
> post your opinions on something. I personally find asking questions rather
> than making statements tends to garner a gentler response, if you're in need
> of one.
>

Conflationist nonsense! One of the problems is precisely that those who
don't like being bullied don't post, because that shuts out an entire
range of opinions from those who are more thoughtful than loud. There's
a problem with just asking questions too. If what you want is a dose of
paternalistic pablum, that's exactly what you'll get. Attend a
political (or some other) speech that is followed by a "question
period", and there is an implicit social barrier between you and the
speaker. If you know he's wrong you still have to concede that he is in
a position to shout louder.
> 3. All mailing lists are at times more hostile than any real life
> conversation. It's far from unique to Wikimedia lists, and I've seen
> *far*more angry flame wars on other mailing lists. If it's a problem
> of the
> medium of mailing lists and not of Wikimedian culture, then there's nothing
> we could change about our culture that would make a mailing list more
> friendly. I for one see us as already going out of our way to try and be a
> culture that welcomes open discussion free of insulting behavior.
>

It's not just mailing lists. Perhaps our worst offenders don't even
participate in the mailing lists. Mailing lists are certainly less
hostile than those in-your-face real life situations that encourage
violence. Perhaps too, those who shout here wouldn't have the courage
to express their real feelings in person to their opponents. Going out
of one's way is primarily a reflection of individual efforts, and we do
have some such individuals. It doesn't generalize well into a community
effort.

Ec
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Nathan <nawrich [at] gmail> wrote:
>
>> The most significant problem, Virgilio, is that there isn't too much people
>> on this list can do. Unless and until problems become so clear that steward
>> or Foundation action are obviously called for, there is unlikely to be much
>> concrete action at all. Since we can't impose a solution to the problems
>> you've identified from afar, and most of us can neither verify these
>> problems nor participate in fixing them without speaking the language...
>> What else should we do?
>>
>> You're right, though, that exchanges on this list aren't always very
>> friendly. Maybe because very few discussions are actually productive, and
>> outside of cooperative effort most friendly exchanges are more likely to be
>> taken off-list.
>>
>> Nathan
>>


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


saintonge at telus

Jun 29, 2009, 11:44 PM

Post #7 of 8 (817 views)
Permalink
Re: "antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies [In reply to]

Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> Marc, you comment is not very optimistic, but it was a great
> incentive to do what I announced above. Hopefully others will be more
> encouraged to voice their ideas about other matters, knowing they'll
> find a friendly hear and some useful and very welcome feedback.
>

Marc and I just happen to come from a generation of grumpy old men who
have never had enough good sense to abandon our principles. If you do
that long enough the optimism can suffer until you can pull yourself off
the carpet and try again.
> I'm glad to find Nathan in a better mood this time :-). Of course
> language is a problem. This is indeed a very interesting problem that
> I hope has a solution in the international wikipedian community. That
> is also an obstacle to getting on greater detail in this list since
> most of its members would not be able to verify and cross check that
> information.
>
> The Foundation can't afford to let a Wikipedia on some obscure
> language (that is not the case of Portuguese) to run wild and be run
> by some mob. At some time a flag will go up. What then? I could offer
> some suggestions, but I was hoping that you all would come up with
> some useful and tested procedures.
>

It's unrealistic to expect those who do not speak your language to solve
the problems. Just because the anglophones happen to be hanging from
the top of the Tower of Babel does not imply that they have any greater
expertise. I am willing to concede that the behaviour on some obscure
language projects is nothing short of outrageous. How do you determine
what the Foundation can or can't afford? Being able to deal with the
problems requires for the community to have a critical membership mass.
The Foundation can't demand other solutions without compromising NPOV
and individual responsibility. If there are specific problems in a
project, and nobody knows about them, nothing can be done.
> I'm afraid to have to admit that the lack of interest and advice that
> I got, so far, covers both list and off-list. I wish that would
> change, again not only for the present case, but what kind of message
> is this sending to others? How sure can we all be that there aren't
> or there would not be other cases in the future?
>

The lack of interest is no surprise. Why would anyone with an already
full plate of problems want to take on a new one? You can never be sure
that there will be no other cases in the future.
> Quite frankly, I would rather be wrong (not a very palatable
> prospect) but give others the assurance that their voices will be
> heard, than letting them remember the story of this guy from
> "somewhere" who blew the whistle and nobody cared.
Preferring to be wrong is very altruistic in an environment where most
are desperate to be right, and to win. You don't have to worry about
them remembering that nobody cared when they never acknowledge that
someone was blowing the whistle in the first place.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


node.ue at gmail

Jun 30, 2009, 2:11 AM

Post #8 of 8 (815 views)
Permalink
Re: "antisocial production" & pt:wiki policies [In reply to]

Behavior on many projects IS outrageous; when someone complains the
response is almost universally that the foundation doesn't get
involved in local project business.

Mark

skype: node.ue



On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Ray Saintonge<saintonge [at] telus> wrote:
> Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
>> Marc, you comment is not very optimistic, but it was a great
>> incentive to do what I announced above. Hopefully others will be more
>> encouraged to voice their ideas about other matters, knowing they'll
>> find a friendly hear and some useful and very welcome feedback.
>>
>
> Marc and I just happen to come from a generation of grumpy old men who
> have never had enough good sense to abandon our principles.  If you do
> that long enough the optimism can suffer until you can pull yourself off
> the carpet and try again.
>> I'm glad to find Nathan in a better mood this time :-). Of course
>> language is a problem. This is indeed a very interesting problem that
>> I hope has a solution in the international wikipedian community. That
>> is also an obstacle to getting on greater detail in this list since
>> most of its members would not be able to verify and cross check that
>> information.
>>
>> The Foundation can't afford to let a Wikipedia on some obscure
>> language (that is not the case of Portuguese) to run wild and be run
>> by some mob. At some time a flag will go up. What then? I could offer
>> some suggestions, but I was hoping that you all would come up with
>> some useful and tested procedures.
>>
>
> It's unrealistic to expect those who do not speak your language to solve
> the problems.  Just because the anglophones happen to be hanging from
> the top of the Tower of Babel does not imply that they have any greater
> expertise.  I am willing to concede that the behaviour on some obscure
> language projects is nothing short of outrageous.  How do you determine
> what the Foundation can or can't afford? Being able to deal with the
> problems requires for the community to have a critical membership mass.
> The Foundation can't demand other solutions without compromising NPOV
> and individual responsibility.  If there are specific problems in a
> project, and nobody knows about them, nothing can be done.
>> I'm afraid to have to admit that the lack of interest and advice that
>> I got, so far, covers both list and off-list. I wish that would
>> change, again not only for the present case, but what kind of message
>> is this sending to others? How sure can we all be that there aren't
>> or there would not be other cases in the future?
>>
>
> The lack of interest is no surprise.  Why would anyone with an already
> full plate of problems want to take on a new one?  You can never be sure
> that there will be no other cases in the future.
>> Quite frankly, I would rather be wrong (not a very palatable
>> prospect) but give others the assurance that their voices will be
>> heard, than letting them remember the story of this guy from
>> "somewhere" who blew the whistle and nobody cared.
> Preferring to be wrong is very altruistic in an environment where most
> are desperate to be right, and to win. You don't have to worry about
> them remembering that nobody cared when they never acknowledge that
> someone was blowing the whistle in the first place.
>
> Ec
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Wikipedia foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.