On 10/2/07, Avi <avi.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote: Surely all the time that would be wasted responding to 6000 hoaxes over 50 years could be used to save more than one life.

On 02/10/2007, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org> wrote: Could, but wouldn't be. Time isn't fungible.

On 02/10/2007, Avi <avi.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote: No, the next best thing would probably have been to ring the police direct and point them to the information in the wikipedia, rather than spamming it across a list in the *hope* that somebody was in a position to action it. I understand that it may have generated more "drama" than I fundamentally disagree that this list should be misused for real-time actions such as this. If nothing else, email is subject to various kinds of failures and delays, and this isn't something you would want to risk it on. As a matter of experience and principle, historically it always seems to be a bad idea to encourage things that are off-topic to be included on a list, no matter how well meaning it might seen. I have never seen it end well, and this one didn't either; no matter how glad we are that everyone is OK, we still got punked. - --Avi -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. If we lived in a perfectly imperfect world things would be a lot better. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

No, the next best thing would probably have been to ring the police direct and point them to the information in the wikipedia, rather than spamming it across a list in the *hope* that somebody was in a position to action it.

Spamming this list with suicide threats is rather inappropriate (but not as inappropriate as ignoring it).

direct it it. Phoning a non-local police force (esp. a foreign one) isn't that easy. I've just spent 5 minutes looking, and couldn't find any way of contacting the london police in an emergency other than "dial 999". I guess one could contact their local police and get them to contact the relevant force, but I'm not sure how well that would work. delays, No means of communication is perfect. What is the alternative? be list, and we How is someone posting a suicide note to the English Wikipedia off-topic for a mailing list for discussion about the English Wikipedia? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Okay, maybe I just need more coffee, but can someone explain to me why in god's name an indef block is the desired response to a suicide note on-wiki?

I could've sworn it was confirmed as a hoax. Didn't the London Police Department say that it was just some lad's idea of a prank or something along those lines?

Yes, I also spoke to the police at the time and they said that I could be assured that it was a hoax, the person was identified, spoken to by police officiers at the presence of his parents, and "strong words of advice" were given. -- Moe James Farrar <james.farrar(a)gmail.com> wrote: That is precisely what the Metropolitan Police said to me, yes. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l --------------------------------- Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

From my estimation, from around the time of

On 10/2/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote: I think the logic is that it's disruptive and indicates someone we probably don't want to continue to have associated with the project, for both their and our good. There may be exceptions and times when allowing them back makes sense eventually, but I can agree that block and freeze or delete pages is appropriate for first responders.

Right! I think that's the basic rule people are taught in dealing with this. I dont see the point really of a block, unless they're repeating it elsewhere--if its a prank, the damage has already been done. And the police are better situated to explain emphatically enough the disruption such stuff causes. Obviously the material should be removed as soon as the nature of it has been determined, but blocks are to prevent harm. On 10/2/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote: -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Okay, maybe I just need more coffee, but can someone explain to me why in god's name an indef block is the desired response to a suicide note on-wiki?

On 02/10/2007, Steven Walling <steven.walling(a)gmail.com> wrote: Block and lock is a thoroughly appropriate reaction, IMO. At times I feel we really need to start thinking more like the Top 10 website that we are. MySpace etc generally removes these things (pages, accounts) once they have been dealt with by the appropriate people, if I'm not mistaken?

On 02/10/2007, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote: Given the spectacular size of the Wikipedia project, we can be assured that people of all kinds will join us and this situation will inevitably happen again. As a consequence, we should have a mechanism in place to deal with it. However, as Durova writes, Exactly. The absolute limit of our involvement should be to pass such a situation on to the relevant persons, which may often be a local police force. So the chain looks like this: User -> Wikipedia -> [mechanism] -> local professionals. This mailing list has demonstrated a wide geographical distribution and a low response time, faster even on occasion than the IRC channel (and more reliable in terms of reach). However, as a publically-archived resource[1], it may not be suitable for responding to difficult personal incidents. I'd like to suggest therefore that we set up a private "alerts" mailing list, with the following rules: 1) Membership by application to list moderators. 2) No rubbernecking. Those who subscribe are volunteering to actively monitor the list and, in reported cases, attempt to contact local authorities. 3) No discussion, /except/ in response to a reported incident, /specifically/ for the purpose of locating appropriate help. 4) No Samaritans. List users /must not/ attempt to personally help those reported in incidents. There should be a private list of volunteers' locations and contact numbers. I know this seems like a lot of work, but the list would be virtually invisible 99% of the time, but it will prove its worth in the 1% when it happens again (and it will; this is the second suicide note I've seen on Wikipedia in the last year). Thoughts, flames? [1] Blocking search engines from the official list archive has evidently not prevented someone from subscribing it to a third-party archiving service, so bear that in mind if you're discussing sensitive topics: http://www.nabble.com/English-Wikipedia-f14021.html -- Earle Martin http://downlode.org/ http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/

On 10/2/07, Avi <avi.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> ... > reports to be sent via e-mail, so the next best thing was to hit > this list, which, based on the near-constant drama feeds (As the > Wiki turns, the Young and the Adminless, General Arbcom, etc. 8- > ) ) demonstrates that it's monitored rather well. > ....

Anyone who makes up a skit for next year's Wikimania called "As the Wiki turns," "The Young and the Adminless," or "General Arbcom" will be my personal hero.