I'm going to take a break from the lists of at least one week. If a
moderated list is not to be--which is a damn shame, because we *REALLY*
need one--I at least definitely need a break.
For the health of the list and the project, I think it would be an
excellent idea if several of us would take a break as well, and let the
more peaceful among us to move on to more productive matters. Then, maybe
when we return, we can be calmer and work together in a spirit of mutual
respect, or at least as much respect as we can muster.
Larry
Jonathan, we'd all be happier -- including you! -- if you would restrain
yourself from engaging in edit wars.
I challenge you to adopt Uncle Ed's policy:
* if someone reverts my change twice in a row, it's time to leave that
article alone for a while.
I can hardly think of an occasion when this self-imposed policy failed
to reach a mutually acceptable balance. (details available on request
:-)
Moreover, it's due in large measure to my dedication to peace that on
frequent occasions all parties to a dispute have agreed to let me
referee the dispute.
I've made thousands of edits; you've only made a few hundred. Now I may
not have absolutely *mastered* the art of making an inoffensive edit.
Yet, I daresay I nearly always manage to get information into articles
without anyone wanting to revert.
This is because of 2 things:
* Jimbo's NPOV policy is a G-E-N-I-U-S idea!!!!
* I am willing to conform my writing to the NPOV
Learn from the master, eh?
Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed
Here is my initial and unofficial tally of who wants whom to be a list moderator:
-- April
* for: Erik, Ed, Larry
Axel Boldt
* for: Erik, Ed, Larry
Brion Vibber
* for: Erik, Ed, Larry
Ed
* for: Larry, Jonathan (Clutch)
* pregnant chad: Erik (only as co-moderator)
* dimpled chad: Toby
* hanging chad: Anthere (pas *entièrement* d'accord)
Jimbo:
* for: everyone but him
* opposed: himself
Julie
* for: Larry
* opposed: Erik, Julie, Toby
KQ
* for: Toby, Larry, Ed
Larry
* for: Ed, Jonathan (Clutch)
* opposed: Erik, Toby
Lee Crocker
* for: Erik, Ed, Larry
Magnus Manske
* for: Erik, Ed, Larry
maveric149
* for: Erik, Ed, Larry
* opposed: Jonathan (Clutch)
Ruth
* for: Larry
* opposed: Toby
Having moderation at all: Larry proposed it, and I assume everyone else who "voted" agrees with it
* dimpled chad: Erik (Eloquence)
* hanging chad: Tom Parmenter (aka Ortolan88)
* pregnant chad: Jimbo (won't fight it, but has reservations)
* opposed: Matthew Woodcraft
(signed)
Ed Poor
Administrator for wikiEN-l
Björn Lindqvist heeft geschreven:
> Hello. Im a long time reader first time writer. I think this list is
> kinda boring and has way to high volume. Im not interested in moderator
> nomiations and meta discussions about flaming and who is a flamer. Im
> arrogant sorry. :-) So my suggestion is why not creature more mailing
> lists? I for one would love a list about important happenings in the
> wikipedia project and separate lists for differenct subjects it would be
> really cool.
>
> //Björn
[posted to wikipedia-l and wikiEN-l]
No, there to many lists now. I have done a proposal to use the list
Announce-l as a moderated low traffic list only for announcing important
things. Because of lack of interest it has not become anything.
The English Wikipedia has now its very own list but a lot of people are
still use Wikipedia-l like it where the English list.
Some people call now Wikipedia-l the "international list" but is not.
Read the postings on Intlwiki-l and compare them whit those on
Wikipedia-l and i must be clear that Intlwiki-l is the international list.
It should be clear;
Intlwiki-l the international list
Wikitech-l the the technical list
Announce-l still born
WikiXX-l the language wikipedia lists
Wikipedia-l not clear -- mostly used as a copy of wikiEN-l
I propose to close Wikipedia-l (no posting allowed)
The flame wars can be done at WikiEN-l
Greetings,
Giskart
I hate to be the one to report this, but Clutch (Jonathan Walter)
continues to violate policy and unilaterally removes portions of the
Richard Wagner article which he considers offensive. This includes
Wagner's specific statements about Jews in "Das Judentum in der Musik",
detailed information about his relationship with Hermann Levi, detailed
information about Hitler's use of Wagner's music and the relationship to
the *Bayreuther Kreis* etc. As Ortolan pointed out, Clutch is writing an
article about "Wagner, the best friend the Jews have had since Moses".
There is consensus on the Talk: page among all participants except Clutch
that Clutch is violating policy. Ed Poor has already repeatedly warned
Clutch, but Clutch refuses to comply. Others who oppose Clutch's edits are
- CYD
- Someone else
- RK
- Ortolan88
- myself.
I have found nobody who supports his edits. I do expect Jonathan Walter,
his alter ego, to quickly argue in support of Clutch, though.
Clutch has also added whimsical statements, such as characterizing
Wagner's anti-Semitic views, which he held from his mid thirties to the
end of his life, as "youthful". I suspect that he is trolling Wikipedia to
prove that he can get away with anything he wants.
Given Clutch's past behavior, which has just recently been pointed out on
the list by mav (Daniel Mayer) and previously by me regarding the User:Lir
episode, I think a warning from the administration is in order. Clutch
should stop reverting the Richard Wagner article immediately, otherwise he
should be banned temporarily.
In order for these measures to be taken as soon as possible, I ask the
other people involved who read this to reply and confirm that they agree
with this.
Regards,
Erik Moeller
Well, I have to go to church now and help the choir practice subversive songs like "In Excelsis Deo" and other Christmas carols.
See ya all tomorrow.
Ed Poor
If a single veto were to derail a nomination, that would appear to winnow the list down to Axel, Lee, Magnus and yours truly (Uncle Ed). A number of nominees have already declined to serve.
On the other hand, maybe I've just turned a deaf ear to all those who wouldn't want me to moderate the list. C'mon, let's have a little negative campaigning, here! ;-)
Ed Poor
>Sorry for the confusion.
>
>I meant that you (KQ) have been nominated, and that Toby, Larry and I
have voiced our support for you.
>
>(Also, no one will be *forced* to become a moderator.)
>
>Ed Poor
That's fine, but I'm sorry I'm so testy lately.
apologies (again),
kq (going to soak his head now)
> The moderator doesn't have to approve every posting. Just watch the
> list, toot the lifeguard whistle from time to time when swimmers go
> too far from shore or bother others, correspond privately with problem
> posters, have the power to check mail from a problem poster and use it
> wisely, including permanently sending their mail to the bit bucket if
> necessary.
>
> Tom P.
> O88
That's exactly what the mailing list software is set up to do.
I just took a look at the administrative website, and I'm prepared at the drop of a hat to implement a Moderation Policy. All I need is a list of who's on the Moderator Team.
I suggest we bat it around for a few more days, though. No sense in making a quick decision.
Ed Poor
> >KQ
> >* for: Toby, Larry, Ed
>
>
> Ed, I did *not* tell you this, and I'm curious how you came to that
> conclusion. I have not discussed moderation with anyone.
>
> kq
Sorry for the confusion.
I meant that you (KQ) have been nominated, and that Toby, Larry and I have voiced our support for you.
(Also, no one will be *forced* to become a moderator.)
Ed Poor