Jimmy Wales wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
If the recent dispute had been guided by these principles it might not have become as heated. When a long-standing editor asks for an explanation, and is told to ask the lawyers we aren't reading the same page anymore. It is quite understandable that people will react with a "Them's fightin' words" attitude.
I disagree quite significantly. If a longstanding editor asks for an explanation, and is told to ask the lawyers, I absolutely do NOT think that it is understandable AT ALL that "them's fightin' words" is the attitude in response. That is just silly. We've been working together for a long time now.
How you say things makes all the difference. A dismissive attitude can very easily be seen as hostile. People react that way when the person responding does not appear to have assumed good faith.
I think Erik, in this case, would agree. If the response had been "Actually, Erik, do me a favor and leave this one protected, I can't explain why at the moment, but please ask Brad if you need more information, perhaps he can give it" then there would have been no explosion.
Yes, that's my point. Words like "do me a favor" and "please" can go a long way.
The person wielding the WP:OFFICE cudgel needs to be sensitive to the community as well as the complainant. He needs to know from experience that any hint of secrecy underlying his actions will raise the temperature of flames by several degrees.
No, actually, I think the community understands that temporarily not all information can always be made immediately public.
Nobody's even saying that it has to be ALL information. A general explanation like, "The subject of this article has complained about it; it has been temporarily taken offline while we verify the facts." This doesn't even mention the specific points that were complained about.
What got things wound up in this case was not the secrecy, but a wildly disproportionate and unfair blocking and desysopping, when a reprotection with a note of "Please ask me before unprotecting this one, there are important issues here" would have done the job just fine.
Probably, but that's the sort of sensitivity I'm talking about. The perception of secrecy can have a greater effect than the secrecy itself.
Ray