Today, a whole thread was deleted from the mediation board.
This was the thread holding the mediation between Bird and Sannse.
The mediation was over, and both of them had deleted their messages, though it seems that a last message was posted by Bird, that Sannse has not seen.
Sannse intended to ask for this thread to be deleted, however she never had the chance, when she came back today, the thread was gone.
We would like to know who deleted the thread.
We would like to know as well for which reason, and from whom request that thread was deleted.
We would also like to indicate that we would appreciate that the mediation committee is asked its opinion before information is deleted from the mediation board, at least that a deletion be authorized by the participants of the thread.
We would also like that a mediator (Sannse candidate) be the owner and the administrator of the board.
Sannse and I express our extrem displeasure of the action done. I would like guarantees that this is not done again. I do not think we should go on using the board if threads can be deleted without notice.
Perhaps we should have a wiki instead of a board ?
Sannse mentions she only feels "a slight grump"
Which when you know her and know me, basically means we probably feel the same on the current topic :-)
Sannse and I express our extrem displeasure of the action done. I would like guarantees that this is not done again. I do not think we should go on using the board if threads can be deleted without notice.
Anthere-
Today, a whole thread was deleted from the mediation board.
Yes. The thread consisted exclusively of
"yesterday" "deleted" "yesterday" "deleted" "yesterday" "deleted"
As there was no information contained in this thread, I removed it, like I would instant-delete an article containing nothing but "oajsdpofjasdf". And no, these messages don't have a history - once you edit it, the old text is gone.
Regards, Erik
Erik wrote:
Anthere-
Today, a whole thread was deleted from the mediation board.
Yes. The thread consisted exclusively of
"yesterday" "deleted" "yesterday" "deleted" "yesterday" "deleted"
As there was no information contained in this thread, I removed it, like I would instant-delete an article containing nothing but "oajsdpofjasdf". And no, these messages don't have a history - once you edit it, the old text is gone.
Regards, Erik
My last message was still there as far as I know (I certainly hadn't removed it yet) and I got a notification of a reply to that message - which I didn't have a chance to read.
I intended to request deletion eventually, of all messages *except* the last in the thread, but I needed to be sure there was no reply to my post first.
Could you not have asked those involved in the thread first?
--sannse
sannse-
My last message was still there as far as I know (I certainly hadn't removed it yet) and I got a notification of a reply to that message - which I didn't have a chance to read.
I didn't see anything of value. Next time, you can delete it yourself - you are now a moderator.
Regards,
Erik
Erik Moeller a écrit:
sannse-
My last message was still there as far as I know (I certainly hadn't removed it yet) and I got a notification of a reply to that message - which I didn't have a chance to read.
I didn't see anything of value. Next time, you can delete it yourself - you are now a moderator.
Regards,
Erik
The fact you named Sannse moderator only partly solve the issue.
You are not a mediator. You deleted a thread without even asking to mediators or to those involved in the discussion what they thought, and without checking that all those involved in the discussion had read all messages adressed to them. The fact there was nothing of value is only an interpretation of yourself.
Not only did you delete the thread without request from us, not only did you do it without asking us previously, but just as in 168 unilateral unsysoping, you again *forgot* to tell us what you did.
Unlike 168 unsysoping, deletion is not reversible.
I would like to ask again that you transfer adminiship of the forum to someone else; If you think it should be done by a developer, please transfert it to Brion or Tim. I do not think it will be very heavy on them.
Thank you
Anthere-
The fact you named Sannse moderator only partly solve the issue.
I deleted a bunch of useless messages. If you think that's something that "needs to be reported" or "needs to be discussed", well, there's a whole message board where you can discuss things like that. Don't expect me to participate, though. As for your insinuation that I intentionally did not report the desysopping of 168 for violation of Wikipedia policy, I will not even dignify that with a response. Your behavior here is increasingly bordering on trolling.
Erik
Anthere wrote to Erik:
I would like to ask again that you transfer adminiship of the forum to someone else; If you think it should be done by a developer, please transfer it to Brion or Tim. I do not think it will be very heavy on them.
As Erik is not a mediator, I agree that it would be appropriate for adminship to be in the hands of a mediator.
Erik Moeller a écrit:
Anthere-
The fact you named Sannse moderator only partly solve the issue.
I deleted a bunch of useless messages. If you think that's something that "needs to be reported" or "needs to be discussed", well, there's a whole message board where you can discuss things like that. Don't expect me to participate, though.
Precisely, I expect you not to participate.
I expect that only mediators, disputants and people interested in mediation participate on that board.
You are not a mediator. As far as you know, you never asked to be. You refused to be an arbitrator as well. So, there are not reasons why you should *arbitrate* the way we mediators choose to work. This is our business, not yours. You are not welcome to moderate the mediation board in a way that is not respectful of our methods.
Mediation is a business that require a bit a delicacy, diplomacy and sympathy. One external to a dispute is very likely to hurt the process when putting his heavy feet in the middle of it. So please do not.
I expect you *not* to participate as a moderator.
Please let mediators do what they agreed to work on, and give admin of the board to them.
Could you please resign from your position of administrator of this board and transfert admin duties to Sannse please ?
If not, could we have a new board with one of us administrator please ?
Ant
Erik Moeller a écrit:
Anthere-
Today, a whole thread was deleted from the mediation board.
Yes. The thread consisted exclusively of
"yesterday" "deleted" "yesterday" "deleted" "yesterday" "deleted"
As there was no information contained in this thread, I removed it, like I would instant-delete an article containing nothing but "oajsdpofjasdf". And no, these messages don't have a history - once you edit it, the old text is gone.
Regards, Erik
On Wednesday, March 17, 2004, at 01:17 PM, Anthere wrote:
Today, a whole thread was deleted from the mediation board.
Isn't there a better place to put this discussion? There ought to be.
Peter
-- ---<>--- -- A house without walls cannot fall. Help build the world's largest encyclopedia at Wikipedia.org -- ---<>--- --
I am deeply concerned that several people appear to consider mediation issues on the english wikipedia are not relevant topics to the english mailing list. I fear, it is an example of how little mediation is integrated in the english wikipedians minds, that discussion about it is thought not appropriate here.
I hesitate to propose that the whole experiment is just stopped dead, or on the contrary, to very regularly advertise it here and there.
What is your opinion Peter ? What do you think mediation is ? How can it help ? Do you think your opinion is welcome to build it, or is it a closed black box? Do you think mediation organisation should be invisible to non mediators ? Where do you suggest we discuss english wikipolitics from now on ?
Peter Jaros a écrit:
On Wednesday, March 17, 2004, at 01:17 PM, Anthere wrote:
Today, a whole thread was deleted from the mediation board.
Isn't there a better place to put this discussion? There ought to be.
Peter
-- ---<>--- -- A house without walls cannot fall. Help build the world's largest encyclopedia at Wikipedia.org -- ---<>--- --
On Thursday, March 18, 2004, at 02:49 PM, Anthere wrote:
What is your opinion Peter ? What do you think mediation is ? How can it help ? Do you think your opinion is welcome to build it, or is it a closed black box? Do you think mediation organisation should be invisible to non mediators ? Where do you suggest we discuss english wikipolitics from now on ?
On the contrary, I feel that mediation itself is important and should be an integral part of the Wikipedia community. I just think that this squabble about the deletion of a thread most of us know nothing about doesn't need to be discussed here. Based on Erik's description of the thread as he saw it, I personally don't see what the big deal is. From what *I* know, it was useless when he found it.
If, on the other hand, it *was* useful to certain people who knew what it meant, I'm fairly certain the large majority of the subscribers to this list *didn't* know what it meant.
I'm sorry. I don't mean to take sides. It's not my business. But that's my point: I don't think its the business of most of us.
Again, I don't mean mediation, I just mean this argument.
Peter
-- ---<>--- -- A house without walls cannot fall. Help build the world's largest encyclopedia at Wikipedia.org -- ---<>--- --
Peter Jaros a écrit:
On Thursday, March 18, 2004, at 02:49 PM, Anthere wrote:
What is your opinion Peter ? What do you think mediation is ? How can it help ? Do you think your opinion is welcome to build it, or is it a closed black box? Do you think mediation organisation should be invisible to non mediators ? Where do you suggest we discuss english wikipolitics from now on ?
On the contrary, I feel that mediation itself is important and should be an integral part of the Wikipedia community. I just think that this squabble about the deletion of a thread most of us know nothing about doesn't need to be discussed here. Based on Erik's description of the thread as he saw it, I personally don't see what the big deal is. From what *I* know, it was useless when he found it.
If, on the other hand, it *was* useful to certain people who knew what it meant, I'm fairly certain the large majority of the subscribers to this list *didn't* know what it meant.
I'm sorry. I don't mean to take sides. It's not my business. But that's my point: I don't think its the business of most of us.
Again, I don't mean mediation, I just mean this argument.
Peter
I am sorry that you did not understand what that argument was really about Peter :-)
Peter Jaros wrote:
On Wednesday, March 17, 2004, at 01:17 PM, Anthere wrote:
Today, a whole thread was deleted from the mediation board.
Isn't there a better place to put this discussion? There ought to be.
This is totally the place for this discussion.
Maybe not the only one, but it's nowhere near inappropriate.