There was no clear statement of "this is the problematic text and this is why it is considered unacceptable", which is a thing that I consider a reasonable expectation, as it is possible to learn from it, understand it, pass constructive criticism or agreement, and use as it a precedent for future expectations. Cheers, Peter
-----Original Message----- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Adam Wight Sent: 11 September 2020 11:56 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review
Is there somewhere we can refer to the list of offensive and unacceptable expressions, and how they are determined?
There were been several explanations already. It's possible to use mild words in a cruel way, for example a father telling their child "You've always had beans for brains." Editors are aware of this simple truth and any feigned outrage must be disingenuous.
It's interesting that I've voiced some extremely harsh criticism of the WMF, even suggesting that the editors form a union and sue for control of the Board, yet I've never once been moderated. Had my job threatened perhaps, but never blocked.
The point here is that petty hostility only achieves the goal of creating an unpleasant and unwelcoming environment. If you (speaking to the people here who are critical of the UCoC) want to make real change, please organize yourselves somewhere else, come up with a coherent argument, and present it here. The constant attrition of "why can't I say 'fart'?" is tiresome and dilutes any conversation of substance.
Kind regards, U:Adamw
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe