Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

Recent firing?

1 2 3

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

saintonge at telus

Nov 1, 2009, 3:34 PM

Post #51 of 72 (1301 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/11/1 Anthony:
>
>> Here in the US, if a company doesn't mind its unemployment tax rate
>> going up, they can do pretty much whatever they want.
>>
>> In the UK, what, if anything, can a company do if they want to
>> redefine a position altogether?
>>
>
> If you are genuinely redefining the position so the existing job will
> no longer exist then you can make the employee redundant (you have to
> pay at least the statutory redundancy pay, which depends on length of
> service). If you are just using it as an excuse to get rid of someone
> you don't like, you'll get sued. If you want to fire someone they have
> to have done something either really seriously wrong or have received
> lots of warnings and not improved.

Employee protection an union rights are significantly weaker in the U.S.
than in most developed country. Some states are significantly worse than
others. Protecting the rights of workers is on the slippery slope to
socialism, and that would damage the ideological purity of free enterprise.

Employers in other countries need to be more creative in offering
undesirables solutions that they can't refuse.

Ec

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

pharosofalexandria at gmail

Nov 1, 2009, 3:45 PM

Post #52 of 72 (1303 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

I can think of approximately 500,000 other issues that it would
perhaps be more productive for us to argue about on this list.

[general comment]

Thanks,
Pharos

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge [at] telus> wrote:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> 2009/11/1 Anthony:
>>
>>> Here in the US, if a company doesn't mind its unemployment tax rate
>>> going up, they can do pretty much whatever they want.
>>>
>>> In the UK, what, if anything, can a company do if they want to
>>> redefine a position altogether?
>>>
>>
>> If you are genuinely redefining the position so the existing job will
>> no longer exist then you can make the employee redundant (you have to
>> pay at least the statutory redundancy pay, which depends on length of
>> service). If you are just using it as an excuse to get rid of someone
>> you don't like, you'll get sued. If you want to fire someone they have
>> to have done something either really seriously wrong or have received
>> lots of warnings and not improved.
>
>
> Employee protection an union rights are significantly weaker in the U.S.
> than in most developed country. Some states are significantly worse than
> others. Protecting the rights of workers is on the slippery slope to
> socialism, and that would damage the ideological purity of free enterprise.
>
> Employers in other countries need to be more creative in offering
> undesirables solutions that they can't refuse.
>
> 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

wikimail at inbox

Nov 1, 2009, 3:48 PM

Post #53 of 72 (1303 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail> wrote:
> 2009/11/1 Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox>:
>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail> wrote:
>>> Yes, you can delete the archives on the WMF site. That does make much
>>> difference. It will still be in everyone's inboxes and on various
>>> other archive sites.
>>
>> So, what, don't do the right thing and delete it because some archive
>> sites might not do the same thing? �Whatever. �Not my fight. �And at
>> least the guy has a relatively common name.
>
> Obvious censorship (which hiding information which is readily
> available elsewhere will be seen as) is rarely beneficial.

Right. Removal of possibly libelous information is what would be seen
as the wrong thing to do. "For a short time he was thought to have
been fired from the Wikimedia Foundation. Nothing was ever proven."

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

WJhonson at aol

Nov 1, 2009, 4:30 PM

Post #54 of 72 (1301 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

"Proven" sounds a little strong to my mind. I would say "there is no
evidence of how the termination occurred"

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

dcollin1 at stevens

Nov 1, 2009, 9:27 PM

Post #55 of 72 (1301 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>
> wrote:
> > Yes, you can delete the archives on the WMF site. That does make much
> > difference. It will still be in everyone's inboxes and on various
> > other archive sites.
>
> So, what, don't do the right thing and delete it because some archive
> sites might not do the same thing? Whatever. Not my fight. And at
> least the guy has a relatively common name.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

How can a WIKIMEDIAN, a member of a project that prides itself in the
freedom of information, support the censoring of information and the
stifling of free discourse like this?

--
DCollins/ST47
Stevens Institute of Technology Class of '13
Administrator, en.wikipedia.org
Maintainer, MediaWiki::Bot module
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

saintonge at telus

Nov 1, 2009, 11:56 PM

Post #56 of 72 (1298 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

Pharos wrote:
> I can think of approximately 500,000 other issues that it would
> perhaps be more productive for us to argue about on this list.
>

So just because you have a personal dislike for a comment you want to
call it arguing. You're making far too big a deal of a casual response
to Thomas.

Ec

> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>>
>>> If you are genuinely redefining the position so the existing job will
>>> no longer exist then you can make the employee redundant (you have to
>>> pay at least the statutory redundancy pay, which depends on length of
>>> service). If you are just using it as an excuse to get rid of someone
>>> you don't like, you'll get sued. If you want to fire someone they have
>>> to have done something either really seriously wrong or have received
>>> lots of warnings and not improved.
>>>
>> Employee protection and union rights are significantly weaker in the U.S.
>> than in most developed countries. Some states are significantly worse than
>> others. Protecting the rights of workers is on the slippery slope to
>> socialism, and that would damage the ideological purity of free enterprise.
>>
>> Employers in other countries need to be more creative in offering
>> undesirables solutions that they can't refuse.
>>

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

innocentkiller at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 1:28 AM

Post #57 of 72 (1299 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge [at] telus> wrote:
> Pharos wrote:
>> I can think of approximately 500,000 other issues that it would
>> perhaps be more productive for us to argue about on this list.
>>
>
> So just because you have a personal dislike for a comment you want to
> call it arguing. You're making far too big a deal of a casual response
> to Thomas.
>
> Ec
>

I agree with Pharos on this one. I don't take issue with one particular
response, it's the whole thread. There are *much* better things we
could argue about. Whether or not the sky is blue sounds like a better
debate, even.

-Chad

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

pharosofalexandria at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 7:14 AM

Post #58 of 72 (1292 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

FYI my comment was on the whole thread, not about any particular response.

Hence the "[general comment]" disclaimer.

Thanks,
Pharos

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 4:28 AM, Chad <innocentkiller [at] gmail> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge [at] telus> wrote:
>> Pharos wrote:
>>> I can think of approximately 500,000 other issues that it would
>>> perhaps be more productive for us to argue about on this list.
>>>
>>
>> So just because you have a personal dislike for a comment you want to
>> call it arguing. You're making far too big a deal of a casual response
>> to Thomas.
>>
>> Ec
>>
>
> I agree with Pharos on this one. I don't take issue with one particular
> response, it's the whole thread. There are *much* better things we
> could argue about. Whether or not the sky is blue sounds like a better
> debate, even.
>
> -Chad
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

thomas.dalton at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 8:25 AM

Post #59 of 72 (1290 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

2009/11/2 Dan Collins <dcollin1 [at] stevens>:
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>
>> wrote:
>> > Yes, you can delete the archives on the WMF site. That does make much
>> > difference. It will still be in everyone's inboxes and on various
>> > other archive sites.
>>
>> So, what, don't do the right thing and delete it because some archive
>> sites might not do the same thing? Whatever. Not my fight. And at
>> least the guy has a relatively common name.
>
> How can a WIKIMEDIAN, a member of a project that prides itself in the
> freedom of information, support the censoring of information and the
> stifling of free discourse like this?

Because some people recognise that in the real world you can't
blinding apply the same ideology in the same way to every situation.

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

thomas.dalton at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 8:27 AM

Post #60 of 72 (1291 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

2009/11/2 Chad <innocentkiller [at] gmail>:
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 2:56 AM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge [at] telus> wrote:
>> Pharos wrote:
>>> I can think of approximately 500,000 other issues that it would
>>> perhaps be more productive for us to argue about on this list.
>>>
>>
>> So just because you have a personal dislike for a comment you want to
>> call it arguing. You're making far too big a deal of a casual response
>> to Thomas.
>>
>> Ec
>>
>
> I agree with Pharos on this one. I don't take issue with one particular
> response, it's the whole thread. There are *much* better things we
> could argue about. Whether or not the sky is blue sounds like a better
> debate, even.

I'm happy arguing about this. No-one is forcing you to do so. If you
want to start another thread about the colour of the sky, go right
ahead.

Why can't people on this list learn how to ignore threads? It is very
easy to do. You just don't click on them when they appear in your
inbox. I'm not interested in everything that is discussed on this
list, but I don't complain about other people discussing it; I just
ignore it.

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

effeietsanders at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 8:30 AM

Post #61 of 72 (1290 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

2009/11/2 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>

>
>
>
> I'm happy arguing about this. No-one is forcing you to do so. If you
> want to start another thread about the colour of the sky, go right
> ahead.
>
> Why can't people on this list learn how to ignore threads? It is very
> easy to do. You just don't click on them when they appear in your
> inbox. I'm not interested in everything that is discussed on this
> list, but I don't complain about other people discussing it; I just
> ignore it.
>
> Why can't people learn when a discussion is irritating other people, why
can't people learn which discussions are most useful to have, why can't
people learn that they might frustrate the very reason for existance of this
list? Why can't people learn to realize when to shut up?
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

thomas.dalton at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 8:49 AM

Post #62 of 72 (1290 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

2009/11/2 effe iets anders <effeietsanders [at] gmail>:
> 2009/11/2 Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm happy arguing about this. No-one is forcing you to do so. If you
>> want to start another thread about the colour of the sky, go right
>> ahead.
>>
>> Why can't people on this list learn how to ignore threads? It is very
>> easy to do. You just don't click on them when they appear in your
>> inbox. I'm not interested in everything that is discussed on this
>> list, but I don't complain about other people discussing it; I just
>> ignore it.
>>
>> Why can't people learn when a discussion is irritating other people, why
> can't people learn which discussions are most useful to have, why can't
> people learn that they might frustrate the very reason for existance of this
> list? Why can't people learn to realize when to shut up?

I do know when a discussion is irritating people - they make that very
clear. What I don't understand is why it irritates them when they
could so easily ignore it. There are no limits on how many threads we
can have, so saying there are other more useful discussions is a
complete non-argument. There are two solutions to this problem -
people can ignore the threads they aren't interested in at negligible
cost to themselves, or other people can stop discussing the things
they are interested it, which is obviously a cost in itself. The
former seems like a better solution to me...

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

WJhonson at aol

Nov 2, 2009, 10:55 AM

Post #63 of 72 (1290 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

In a message dated 11/2/2009 8:31:15 AM Pacific Standard Time,
effeietsanders [at] gmail writes:

> Why can't people learn when a discussion is irritating other people, why
> can't people learn which discussions are most useful to have, why can't
> people learn that they might frustrate the very reason for existance of
> this
> list? Why can't people learn to realize when to shut up?>>

Why can't people realize they have no right to demand that others be
silent? Why can't people realize that the delete key is their friend, no one is
making anyone read anything, that there is a choice? Why can't people
realize that what is irritating to some, is interesting to others? Why can't
people realize that censorship does not stop conversation, it makes it explode
elsewhere to the detriment of all parties?

Will

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

thomas.dalton at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 10:59 AM

Post #64 of 72 (1290 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

2009/11/2 <WJhonson [at] aol>:
> In a message dated 11/2/2009 8:31:15 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> effeietsanders [at] gmail writes:
>
>
>> Why can't people learn when a discussion is irritating other people, why
>> can't people learn which discussions are most useful to have, why can't
>> people learn that they might frustrate the very reason for existance of
>> this
>> list? Why can't people learn to realize when to shut up?>>
>
> Why can't people realize they have no right to demand that others be
> silent? Why can't people realize that the delete key is their friend, no one is
> making anyone read anything, that there is a choice? Why can't people
> realize that what is irritating to some, is interesting to others? Why can't
> people realize that censorship does not stop conversation, it makes it explode
> elsewhere to the detriment of all parties?

Why can't people use email clients that don't break threads? ;)

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

WJhonson at aol

Nov 2, 2009, 11:04 AM

Post #65 of 72 (1292 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

In a message dated 11/2/2009 10:59:23 AM Pacific Standard Time,
thomas.dalton [at] gmail writes:

> Why can't people use email clients that don't break threads? ;) >>>

AOL = Satan
They are out to destroy all life and light.

Will

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

wikimail at inbox

Nov 2, 2009, 11:16 AM

Post #66 of 72 (1292 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Dan Collins <dcollin1 [at] stevens> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton [at] gmail>
>> wrote:
>> > Yes, you can delete the archives on the WMF site. That does make much
>> > difference. It will still be in everyone's inboxes and on various
>> > other archive sites.
>>
>> So, what, don't do the right thing and delete it because some archive
>> sites might not do the same thing? �Whatever. �Not my fight. �And at
>> least the guy has a relatively common name.
>
> How can a WIKIMEDIAN, a member of a project that prides itself in the
> freedom of information, support the censoring of information and the
> stifling of free discourse like this?

I don't support the stifling of free discourse. I don't have a
problem with the issue being brought up and discussed, I just think
it'd be nice to take the person's name out of the archive, at least
unless and until there is some evidence that it is true.

I fail to see how this is contrary to the mission of the Wikimedia
Foundation to "empower and engage people around the world to collect
and develop educational content under a free license or in the public
domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally". I think it
promotes it, indirectly by making for a more friendly environment if
not directly by paving the way for real educational content.

To anyone else who doesn't like this thread (especially the ones who
are actually trying to stifle free discourse). I'm sorry, but I think
this subthread is completely within the scope of this list. I think
it's essential for us all to fight hard against the notion that
removal of rumors and libel is somehow "OMG CENSORSHIP" which is
forbidden by the organization's mission.

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

meta.sj at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 1:46 PM

Post #67 of 72 (1290 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Anthony <wikimail [at] inbox> wrote:

>
> I fail to see how this is contrary to the mission of the Wikimedia
> Foundation to "empower and engage people around the world to collect
> and develop educational content under a free license or in the public
> domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally". I think it
> promotes it, indirectly by making for a more friendly environment if
> not directly by paving the way for real educational content.
>

Yes. "Making for a more friendly environment" is absolutely relevant to
that mission.

Thomas writes:
> I do know when a discussion is irritating people - they make that very
> clear. What I don't understand is why it irritates them when they
> could so easily ignore it. There are no limits on how many threads we
> can have, so saying there are other more useful discussions is a
> complete non-argument.

This is also about making for a more friendly environment. To be fair,
technology has backpedaled a bit here. Many modern mail clients don't
support killing threads, so you have to delete each new message as it comes
along, and have no choice but to read annoying subject headers every time.
[dear gmail: this is ridiculous.] Both of which make flames or other
deathless threads annoying proportional to their size.

> There are two solutions to this problem -
> people can ignore the threads they aren't interested in at negligible
> cost to themselves, or other people can stop discussing the things
> they are interested it, which is obviously a cost in itself.

This is the heart of the matter. A number of people have already stopped
discussing the things they are interested in here, or even reading
regularly, because they find this forum too noisy to use. So it is a
tradeoff between who feels comfortable posting and reading here.

Since this is one of the few cross-foundation channels, as many people as
possible should feel somewhat comfortable here. And since all channels can
be saturated -- and many people's responses indicate that this one gets
saturated for them by long contentious threads -- either the aggressive
posters or the saturated readers are going to find their preferred use of
the list frustrated.

If you find yourself posting for the fifth or eighth time to a thread,
please consider this tradeoff, and other ways to get your point across. I
prefer wikiessays (rc is a much harder channel to saturate), but ymmv.

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

tstarling at wikimedia

Nov 2, 2009, 2:13 PM

Post #68 of 72 (1288 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

WJhonson [at] aol wrote:
> In a message dated 11/2/2009 10:59:23 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> thomas.dalton [at] gmail writes:
>
>
>> Why can't people use email clients that don't break threads? ;) >>>
>
> AOL = Satan
> They are out to destroy all life and light.

Last time I checked, you could use any email client you liked when
connected to AOL, you only have to use the broken one they supply if
you don't understand how to use computers.

<http://help.aol.com/help/microsites/search.do?cmd=displayKC&docType=kc&externalId=217449>

-- Tim Starling

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

wjhonson at aol

Nov 2, 2009, 2:55 PM

Post #69 of 72 (1286 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

Personally, I process about two or three hundred emails per day (yes per day), so the small amount of noise the Foundation list creates is negligible to me.

If someone is so annoyed by a thread, that they can't even bother to DWR (delete without reading) based merely on the subject title, I would think we need to question whether that person has the right temperament for the internet whatsoever. I delete at least two or three dozen emails every day without reading them, if I already know the subject is not going to be of "interest" to me.

I would submit the real issue here, is not that people are doing that or could, but rather that they have a compulsion to *keep reading* the thread. Sort of a, "I don't want to be left out, or I want to keep watching the train wreck" or something. I'm not a psychologist. I do know however, that the entire issue of "let's close this thread", "let's moderated these people", " this is too noisy" and so on, is endemic to the entire email world. Not merely this list.

I can't think of any list I'm on (and I'm on a few dozen), where the issue does not come up with regularity. It is merely part of the way internetlife is, in my opinion.

Will

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

wjhonson at aol

Nov 2, 2009, 2:58 PM

Post #70 of 72 (1286 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

That's a bit of an extreme remark Tim. There are millions of computer programmers in the world, who do not know or care to try to learn how to operate AOL. Not every programmers is a Windows programmer. Myopic view of "understanding computers". I could just as well opine, that people who don't know how to relink bombed Pascal pointers "don't understand computers".

In fact I just sent a nasty-gram to the people at JustAnswers.com who, in deciding whether you are a "Computer Expert" ask you eight questions about Windows ! What a bunch of noodles.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia>
To: foundation-l [at] lists
Sent: Mon, Nov 2, 2009 2:13 pm
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Recent firing?

WJhonson [at] aol wrote:
> In a message dated 11/2/2009 10:59:23 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> thomas.dalton [at] gmail writes:
>
>
>> Why can't people use email clients that don't break threads? ;) >>>
>
> AOL = Satan
> They are out to destroy all life and light.

Last time I checked, you could use any email client you liked when
connected to AOL, you only have to use the broken one they supply if
you don't understand how to use computers.

<http://help.aol.com/help/microsites/search.do?cmd=displayKC&docType=kc&externalId=217449>

-- Tim Starling

_______________________________________________
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

gerard.meijssen at gmail

Nov 2, 2009, 3:07 PM

Post #71 of 72 (1286 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

Hoi,
It is not about you.. it is about US ... and some of us are not like you, do
not agree with you and have a different outlook on this... Please get it
that most people do not have the time to waste on so many e-mails.

There is also the fact that most threads including this one do not stay on
topic and consequently sometimes they become interesting.
Thanks,
GerardM

2009/11/2 <wjhonson [at] aol>

> Personally, I process about two or three hundred emails per day (yes per
> day), so the small amount of noise the Foundation list creates is negligible
> to me.
>
> If someone is so annoyed by a thread, that they can't even bother to DWR
> (delete without reading) based merely on the subject title, I would think we
> need to question whether that person has the right temperament for the
> internet whatsoever. I delete at least two or three dozen emails every day
> without reading them, if I already know the subject is not going to be of
> "interest" to me.
>
> I would submit the real issue here, is not that people are doing that or
> could, but rather that they have a compulsion to *keep reading* the thread.
> Sort of a, "I don't want to be left out, or I want to keep watching the
> train wreck" or something. I'm not a psychologist. I do know however, that
> the entire issue of "let's close this thread", "let's moderated these
> people", " this is too noisy" and so on, is endemic to the entire email
> world. Not merely this list.
>
> I can't think of any list I'm on (and I'm on a few dozen), where the issue
> does not come up with regularity. It is merely part of the way internetlife
> is, in my opinion.
>
> Will
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

wjhonson at aol

Nov 2, 2009, 3:15 PM

Post #72 of 72 (1288 views)
Permalink

Re: Recent firing? [In reply to]

And I never said it is about *me* stop trying to make this personal.
I am not directing my remarks at *you*, so stop directing yours at *me*.
There are many people on this very list who have said essentially the exact same thing.
You should re-read the thread again to make that apparent, if you're not clear on that.
Thanks
Will

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen [at] gmail>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l [at] lists>
Sent: Mon, Nov 2, 2009 3:07 pm
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Recent firing?

Hoi,
It is not about you.. it is about US ... and some of us are not like you, do
not agree with you and have a different outlook on this... Please get it
that most people do not have the time to waste on so many e-mails.

There is also the fact that most threads including this one do not stay on
topic and consequently sometimes they become interesting.
Thanks,
GerardM

2009/11/2 <wjhonson [at] aol>

> Personally, I process about two or three hundred emails per day (yes per
> day), so the small amount of noise the Foundation list creates is negligible
> to me.
>
> If someone is so annoyed by a thread, that they can't even bother to DWR
> (delete without reading) based merely on the subject title, I would think we
> need to question whether that person has the right temperament for the
> internet whatsoever. I delete at least two or three dozen emails every day
> without reading them, if I already know the subject is not going to be of
> "interest" to me.
>
> I would submit the real issue here, is not that people are doing that or
> could, but rather that they have a compulsion to *keep reading* the thread.
> Sort of a, "I don't want to be left out, or I want to keep watching the
> train wreck" or something. I'm not a psychologist. I do know however, that
> the entire issue of "let's close this thread", "let's moderated these
> people", " this is too noisy" and so on, is endemic to the entire email
> world. Not merely this list.
>
> I can't think of any list I'm on (and I'm on a few dozen), where the issue
> does not come up with regularity. It is merely part of the way internetlife
> is, in my opinion.
>
> Will
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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

1 2 3

View All

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads