On Dec 9, 2007 5:37 PM, private musings <thepmaccount(a)gmail.com> wrote:
To my mind, this dialog has become rather
unfortunately overly polarised.
It's probably not as hard as we think to find common ground, which would
certainly be for the good.
My main concern in all this (which I think is echoed elsewhere clearly and
loudly) is that people have been taking 'on-wiki' actions without the
appropriate level of 'on-wiki' discussion. I think we would all agree that a
group (say 4 or 5) of 'senior' editors forming opinions privately, and then
each taking action in the matter at hand at the very least is behaviour
which probably requires great care to avoid becoming problematic.
Why do you keep repeating these things as if they're facts? Do you
think it helps the tenor of the conversation to continually post
unproven (and, in fact, repudiated) allegations, and then claim that
they represent a "problematic" issue about which "great care" must be
taken?
Here's what would help the tenor of discussions on the list; stop
speculating, and then insisting the sky is falling based on that
speculation.
If you are genuinely incredulous, I'd recommend
the
advice given previously - take a walk, calm down,
People who have no idea what others are talking don't need to "calm
down"; mystification does not imply a lack of calmness, and it's very
odd you would suggest they are the same thing, or inevitably accompany
each other.