No, we changed that, remember? https://meta.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Language_committee/Voting_policy
Am 11.12.2017 3:43 nachm. schrieb "Milos Rancic" millosh@gmail.com:
Oliver, I do not agree with your proposal and it's already doomed, as our present system for making decisions is strict consensus.
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Oliver Stegen oliver_stegen@sil.org wrote:
If we cannot agree on committee etiquette, i.e. rules about interaction which respects human dignity, we will not succeed in setting up rules about anything else either.
I propose the following rule:
- No flaming! (i.e. no ad hominem attacks, and no profanity)
- Perpetrators who repeat the offense after being reprimanded will be
blocked for one month.
Feel free to discuss, add and/or amend. I still think we have to start somewhere to get our interaction to an acceptable level again. There are some widely agreed-upon netiquette standards out there (e.g. [1]-[3]; the slide inserted below is from [4]). I would have hoped that we don't need such rules but frequent flare-ups over the years have finally convinced me otherwise.
I herewith *ask for votes on my proposed rule* within the usual 7-day deadline. Should discussion lead to additions or amendments (like including more detailed rules from the examples I listed below), the deadline will be postponed accordingly.
Fwiw, Oliver
[1] https://lifehacker.com/5473859/basic-etiquette-for-email- lists-and-forums [2] http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/7-netiquette-guidelines-writing -emails-forum-posts/ (esp. no.7) [3] https://www.simplehelp.net/2006/08/14/how-to-be-polite-while -youre-online-practicing-good-netiquette/ [4] http://images.slideplayer.com/47/11762279/slides/slide_3.jpg
On 11-Dec-17 12:21, Milos Rancic wrote:
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Oliver Stegen oliver_stegen@sil.org oliver_stegen@sil.org wrote:
I support Michael's call to stop offensive rants. And to be precise: Miloš, I perceive your posts and attitude to be highly disruptive (and that is not just my personal opinion but based on the standards of committee etiquette of several other non-profit organisations I'm familiar with) - it is impossible to work together in the face of such accusations and language. Please change and interact with us in a civil way. If you cannot do that, I support Michael's suggestion to reconsider your participation here.
I see this kind of emails useless. I've already said I will do the same whenever provoked and I've already said what you should do to "reconsider" my position here.
Langcom mailing listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.http://www.avg.com
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom