-----Original Message----- From: The Cunctator [mailto:cunctator@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2007 10:13 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] HD DVD key and the spam blacklist
On 5/2/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 5/2/07, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
This is a different type of blacklist. The spam blacklist which can be edited by any meta admin only applies to URLs. The regex blacklist applies to any text, whether in URL format or not. On Wikimedia, I believe only people with server access could edit that, but that doesn't mean it was an official Wikimedia decision. The majority of people with server access are not Wikimedia employees.
So who are they accountable to, no one? Isn't obviously problematic that people can unilaterally make such major decisions with neither the request of the foundation nor the community?
Yes.
There is a choice to make. Do you want people in positions of authority to take responsibility and do what needs to be done, or do you take the position that such actions cannot be taken until consensus is reached?
I'm for responsibility. Mistakes can be sorted out at leisure.
Fred
Fred Bauder wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: The Cunctator [mailto:cunctator@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2007 10:13 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] HD DVD key and the spam blacklist
On 5/2/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 5/2/07, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
This is a different type of blacklist. The spam blacklist which can be edited by any meta admin only applies to URLs. The regex blacklist applies to any text, whether in URL format or not. On Wikimedia, I believe only people with server access could edit that, but that doesn't mean it was an official Wikimedia decision. The majority of people with server access are not Wikimedia employees.
So who are they accountable to, no one? Isn't obviously problematic that people can unilaterally make such major decisions with neither the request of the foundation nor the community?
Yes.
There is a choice to make. Do you want people in positions of authority to take responsibility and do what needs to be done, or do you take the position that such actions cannot be taken until consensus is reached?
I'm for responsibility. Mistakes can be sorted out at leisure.
Accountability is not about delaying decisions, it's about review, and the ability to correct or punish errors. From the Collaborative Dictionary of English:
Accountability \Ac*count`a*bil"i*ty, n. The state of being accountable; liability to be called on to render an account; the obligation to bear the consequences for failure to perform as expected; accountableness.
Sysadmins are accountable, see my other post in this thread.
-- Tim Starling
On 5/5/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: The Cunctator [mailto:cunctator@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2007 10:13 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] HD DVD key and the spam blacklist
On 5/2/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 5/2/07, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
This is a different type of blacklist. The spam blacklist which can be edited by any meta admin only applies to URLs. The regex blacklist applies to any text, whether in URL format or not. On Wikimedia, I believe only people with server access could edit that, but that doesn't mean it was an official Wikimedia decision. The majority of people with server access are not Wikimedia employees.
So who are they accountable to, no one? Isn't obviously problematic that people can unilaterally make such major decisions with neither the request of the foundation nor the community?
Yes.
There is a choice to make. Do you want people in positions of authority to take responsibility and do what needs to be done, or do you take the position that such actions cannot be taken until consensus is reached?
I'm for responsibility. Mistakes can be sorted out at leisure.
Mistakes should be sorted out as soon as possible. Consensus need not be reached beforehand for situations where consensus is fairly obvious anyway. But these types of emergency scenarios should be explained and reviewed.
To my mind the most reasonable structure here would be for those with this sort of access to be governed by the foundation. And to that extent I would have expected either a notice of support or a reprimand and forced reversal by now. Instead, it seems, we get nothing.
Anthony
On 5/5/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: The Cunctator [mailto:cunctator@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2007 10:13 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] HD DVD key and the spam blacklist
On 5/2/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 5/2/07, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
This is a different type of blacklist. The spam blacklist which can be edited by any meta admin only applies to URLs. The regex blacklist applies to any text, whether in URL format or not. On Wikimedia, I believe only people with server access could edit that, but that doesn't mean it was an official Wikimedia decision. The majority of people with server access are not Wikimedia employees.
So who are they accountable to, no one? Isn't obviously problematic that people can unilaterally make such major decisions with neither the request of the foundation nor the community?
Yes.
There is a choice to make. Do you want people in positions of authority to take responsibility and do what needs to be done, or do you take the position that such actions cannot be taken until consensus is reached?
I'm for responsibility. Mistakes can be sorted out at leisure.
I'm for increasing the base of responsibility.
On 5/6/07, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I'm for increasing the base of responsibility.
And for increasing its transparency. Is there a log somewhere, who has access to this? Can we see the list of censored strings? Also, string level censorship may be useful, but it is in general not the main thing that developers do. If we continue to do this more in the future it would be much better to have people whose explicit responsibility is doing this do it rather than the people who technically can, but were trusted by the community to do very different, unrelated things.
Judson [[:en:User:Cohesion]]