On 12/4/06, David Boothroyd david@election.demon.co.uk wrote:
- The fact that Anne Milton is quoted by Sandra Howard asserting
that
Tim Ireland was "stalking" her through the weblog is particularly significant. It is a notably extreme accusation.
Well, the jury will have to describe whether objecting to such harassment makes Anne Milton more notable than otherwise. Or whether she is reacting as a normal person might well do.
That does beg the question of whether the existence of the blog or its contents amounts to "harassment", or whether such harassment would be over and above the level of scrutiny and fair comment anyone might expect when standing for public office. I haven't made my mind up on that.
And we should let people make up their own minds by letting them see the new stories and the blog posts.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 18:41:11 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
And we should let people make up their own minds by letting them see the new stories and the blog posts
You really think attack blogs should be linked to articles on living individuals on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds? Wow.
Guy (JzG)
On 12/4/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 18:41:11 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
And we should let people make up their own minds by letting them see the
new
stories and the blog posts
You really think attack blogs should be linked to articles on living individuals on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds? Wow.
Is that "Wow" facetious? I hope so.
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 18:50:21 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
You really think attack blogs should be linked to articles on living individuals on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds? Wow.
Is that "Wow" facetious? I hope so.
Not especially, no. If one is George W. Bush, and an attack blog is in the top 50 sites on Alexa, I'd expect it to be linked, but this is a trivial story from the election, almost entirely unrelated to the MP's performance of her duties and of strictly limited significance in her life as a whole. Constituent opposes candidate? Interesting during the election, maybe interesting as a sidenote. Constituent opposes candidate, read all the garbage here? Not really the kind of thing we should aspire to have in biographies, surely?
Guy (JzG)
On 12/4/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 18:50:21 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
You really think attack blogs should be linked to articles on living individuals on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds? Wow.
Is that "Wow" facetious? I hope so.
Not especially, no. If one is George W. Bush, and an attack blog is in the top 50 sites on Alexa, I'd expect it to be linked, but this is a trivial story from the election, almost entirely unrelated to the MP's performance of her duties and of strictly limited significance in her life as a whole. Constituent opposes candidate? Interesting during the election, maybe interesting as a sidenote. Constituent opposes candidate, read all the garbage here? Not really the kind of thing we should aspire to have in biographies, surely?
You didn't write "You really think trivially related sites should be linked to articles on living people on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds?"
And I wasn't responding to that, since that's not what you wrote.
So I'm not sure where you got the impetus to write your response to my question.
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 02:32:22 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
You really think attack blogs should be linked to articles on living individuals on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds? Wow.
Is that "Wow" facetious? I hope so.
Not especially, no. If one is George W. Bush, and an attack blog is in the top 50 sites on Alexa, I'd expect it to be linked, but this is a trivial story from the election, almost entirely unrelated to the MP's performance of her duties and of strictly limited significance in her life as a whole. Constituent opposes candidate? Interesting during the election, maybe interesting as a sidenote. Constituent opposes candidate, read all the garbage here? Not really the kind of thing we should aspire to have in biographies, surely?
You didn't write "You really think trivially related sites should be linked to articles on living people on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds?" And I wasn't responding to that, since that's not what you wrote. So I'm not sure where you got the impetus to write your response to my question.
And I'm not sure where you got the impetus to write your response to mine. So let's start again, shall we?
What do you think should be the circumstances under which we link an attack blog from an article on a living individual?
Guy (JzG)
On 12/5/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 02:32:22 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
You really think attack blogs should be linked to articles on living individuals on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds? Wow.
Is that "Wow" facetious? I hope so.
Not especially, no. If one is George W. Bush, and an attack blog is in the top 50 sites on Alexa, I'd expect it to be linked, but this is a trivial story from the election, almost entirely unrelated to the MP's performance of her duties and of strictly limited significance in her life as a whole. Constituent opposes candidate? Interesting during the election, maybe interesting as a sidenote. Constituent opposes candidate, read all the garbage here? Not really the kind of thing we should aspire to have in biographies, surely?
You didn't write "You really think trivially related sites should be linked to articles on living people on the grounds that readers can make up their own minds?" And I wasn't responding to that, since that's not what you wrote. So I'm not sure where you got the impetus to write your response to my
question.
And I'm not sure where you got the impetus to write your response to mine. So let's start again, shall we?
What do you think should be the circumstances under which we link an attack blog from an article on a living individual?
When the attack blog is mentioned in the article.
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 11:07:47 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
What do you think should be the circumstances under which we link an attack blog from an article on a living individual?
When the attack blog is mentioned in the article.
OK, and in this case it's not. What is mentioned is that some coverage was given in the press to the opposition of Tim Ireland, including his blog. For that, we have a source: the press article; and a link: to Tim Ireland's article. Take three links into the shower? Not me. Especially when one of them calls the subject a "dipstick".
However, I am increasingly of the view that this incident is not really significant. Can anyone list the MPs who have *not* been loudly criticised by at least one constituent?
Guy (JzG)
What do you care is someone's called a dipstick? We shouldn't be passing value judgments, in the most part.
On 12/5/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 11:07:47 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
What do you think should be the circumstances under which we link an attack blog from an article on a living individual?
When the attack blog is mentioned in the article.
OK, and in this case it's not. What is mentioned is that some coverage was given in the press to the opposition of Tim Ireland, including his blog. For that, we have a source: the press article; and a link: to Tim Ireland's article. Take three links into the shower? Not me. Especially when one of them calls the subject a "dipstick".
However, I am increasingly of the view that this incident is not really significant. Can anyone list the MPs who have *not* been loudly criticised by at least one constituent?
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 15:32:39 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
What do you care is someone's called a dipstick? We shouldn't be passing value judgments, in the most part.
I'll leave you to field the OTRS complaint then :-)
Guy (JzG)
??
On 12/5/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 15:32:39 -0500, "The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
What do you care is someone's called a dipstick? We shouldn't be passing value judgments, in the most part.
I'll leave you to field the OTRS complaint then :-)
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
The Cunctator wrote:
??
Yeah, I know. I ran across this myself in an edit summary, and made the point that people could at least wiki-link to the page if they reference it in an edit cummary, but whether that is taken on board I don't know. I have to say I tend to view this complaints handling system in outright horror, but I guess it's there for a reason that I've not had explained or seen discussed as yet. Seems to operate as something of a cabal, but as Wikipedia doesn't do cabals, just covens and committees and God Kings and admins and bureaucrats and stewards and Danny and Brad, I think it gets by.
From [[Wikipedia:OTRS]]
In the context of Wikipedia, OTRS is used as a shorthand for the people, process, and software that surround the handling of email sent through the various Contact Wikipedia links. The software used for the processing of such mail is the Open Ticket Request System, which provides an organized way for multiple people to categorize and respond to email.
As of July 2006, approximately 200 emails per day are received, about half of them in English.
In the course of replying to emails, OTRS personnel may edit articles. Most frequently, such edits involve removal of vandalism or removal of unsourced derogatory assertions. Less frequently, OTRS personnel handle copyvio complaints using the standard process, or delete personal information from article histories.
The contents of emails sent to the OTRS addresses are confidential.