Hoi,
It is nice to be against the wording of a policy that is well understood
because it is not "nice" in the way it is worded. It is another thing to be
as descriptive and clear in the messaging using other terminology. So how do
you intent to say "Don't be a dick" ?
In my opinion our credibility and reputation suffers as much when we are not
clear. It is a different kind of damage when there is too much waffle.
Without a policy as clearly worded, I would let the current policy stand.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 11/6/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86(a)comcast.net> wrote:
on 11/6/07 9:18 AM, David Gerard at dgerard(a)gmail.com wrote:
On 06/11/2007, Marc Riddell
<michaeldavid86(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> David, 'because everybody does it' is not an excuse to do something in
the
> Wikimedia Projects. Wikimedia must create its
own distinct identity;
and its
> reputation and credibility will be a great
part of that identity - and
its
use of
language a crucial part as well.
The language of social pages should not be the language of Wikimedia
policies.
No, I mean it's actually, functionally speaking, the first rule of all
social spaces on and offline.
OK, the behavior the language is describing might be the "first rule",
but
"dick" and "jerk" still should have no place in Wikimedia policy
language.
Marc
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l