In a message dated 2/24/2008 4:06:31 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
geniice(a)gmail.com writes:
No just interested in playing games. Either you have a logically
consistent evidence based problem with BCB or you don't. If you do
produce it if you don't admit it.>>
----------------------------------------------------
The evidence has been presented.
BC's response or lack thereof is noted there.
The actions of the bot were unnecessarily aggressive. The actions of its
owner elicited vocal calls from established editors.
Ignoring the situation does not improve the project.
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 4:21:46 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
dgerard(a)gmail.com writes:
but rather people who
don't understand and/or don't want to understand WP:NONFREE and why
it's there (as you showed earlier in this thread).>>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David this is not the issue, as I've already pointed out.
The issue has nothing to do with understanding current policy, or not
understanding it.
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 4:21:46 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
dgerard(a)gmail.com writes:
Your total "evidence" so far is "a lot of people are upset their
pictures might be deleted for not following policy as written." If
that's the "community" opinion, then "the community" is *just plain
wrong*.>>
------------------
No that isn't what occurred.
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 3:58:57 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
george.herbert(a)gmail.com writes:
There is complete transparency in what Betacommandbot is doing.
<snip>
Is there any part of that which is unclear to you?
------------------------
Yes the transparency part. But it's not *unclear* exactly.
BC has refused to allow transparency into the code of his bot.
We cannot determine what the bot exactly is using as its rules of conduct.
So we cannot satisfactorily determine that it is actually in accord with the
community consensus.
Will Johnson
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 3:59:12 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
dgerard(a)gmail.com writes:
You've yet to link a single violation, despite repeated requests.>>
-------
I did address this David.
I never stated that BCB is "violating policy".
"Following policy", and "violating policy", create a false dichotomy.
There are more possibilities than two in this situation.
Will Johnson
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 3:42:33 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
george.herbert(a)gmail.com writes:
That this whole thing is perpetually badly communicated is a failure in how
Betacommand and others are operating, but that doesn't mean that the bot is
breaking policy.>>
-------------------------------
You can follow policy while simultaneously upsetting 5 or 50 established
editors.
That is not a rationale for what BCB did.
Not that I agree that BCB is actually following policy. BCB has, and
continues to refuse any transparency into his process. So we really can't tell can
we?
It should be fairly plain that many established editors have issues with the
situation. So merely stating that he is or isn't following policy doesn't
quite get at the core issue.
Will Johnson
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 3:15:59 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
dgerard(a)gmail.com writes:
Lots of people being loudly wrong doesn't mean Betacommand or his bot
are doing anything wrong, oddly enough. Noise is not evidence.>>
-------------
The evidence is there. The established editors voicing issues, are not
"loudly wrong". They just don't agree with BCB's particular interpretation of
how things should be.
The system works based on consensus and co-operation. This page illustrates
problems which should be discussed and resolved, not ignored.
Will Johnson
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
I will admit that my characterization was extreme if Geni et al will admit
that BCB is a problem, perceived by multiple established editors, as a real and
significant issue that should be resolved.
The drum-beating of "everything is OK" doesn't pass.
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 1:32:49 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
geniice(a)gmail.com writes:
We have about 200K fair use images. Doesn't look like all fair use has
been got rid of.>>
------------------------------
Perhaps you'd like to explain then, in your own words, exactly what you
think what is the current beef against BCB ? Not my beef, I mean why are there
multiple established editors complaining?
I would note that I am *not* one of those who brought the issue in front of
the community.
So what do you think the issue is?
Will Johnson
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
In a message dated 2/24/2008 1:45:40 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
dgerard(a)gmail.com writes:
> > The Bot is applying a section of the rules as written no more no
less.>>
> I disagree that the Bot is doing this.
What are the rules it's violating? Examples please.>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
That isn't the opposite however.
Genie said that it's applying rules as writen.
I never said it's violating rules.
There is a false dichotomy created by your response :) I'm sure you see it.
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du…
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)