[WikiEN-l] resolution-l

[Jay Litwyn]

Subject-Was: Blocking / Moderation

Okay, so lets properly open the topic.
How would anyone go about getting participants in a dispute to subscribe to 
this list or any other?

"Bod Notbod" <bodnotbod at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:3ae0a6ac0907280131k4e867aeer147f5fd65bedd9c4 at mail.gmail.com...
> Stevertigo:
>
>> And of course this violating concept appears to be indemic wherever
>> people feel they can neglect transparency - as mandated in their own
>> mandates, perhaps - making their deliberations in private and giving
>> people only decrees and motions. Wales, who was for a long time our
>> most upstanding proponent of openness, and who made it a point to deal
>> personally and openly with nearly every issue that came up - on this
>> very list, as a matter of fact - would be quite unhappy with this
>> trend.
>
> I like transparency too.
>
> It makes me pause to wonder whether a dispute resolution mailing list
> is actually against the grain of that. 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.

That is rectifiable to some degree.
Someone could make a userbox for subscribers that includes both nntp and 
e-mail methods of access.
If it propagates anything like the basic grammar boxes, then we might double 
subscription in a year.

> 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.

It does naturally hav a different audience, and I think your perception of 
how many people DO see a dispute when there is one just because they CAN see 
a dispute is a bit at odds with reality. I know of one that I've pretty much 
let rest, because I do not think any of the three participants will remember 
it, either.

> 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.

My method of engaging administrators probably should hav included an 
invitation to join the list, or a request to see discussion of my case on 
unblock-l. Hindsight. I did not like any of their slack research on me, 
anyway.

> 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.

That goes back to my orijinal question. How would anyone go about getting 
participants in a dispute to sign up for wikien-l , unblock-l, or any other? 
There are reciprocal links you could make. I used to make bookmarks to 
USENET discussions with NNTP URLS and post them to my website. Now, I am 
more prone to post search URLS there. *If you can find an article here on 
the gmane web server, then you can pull a permalink out of it and post that 
to wikipedia*. Everything slick takes a right click.
_______
news://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.english