One serious issue with the current status of the study
is that it appears to
be fairly death - especially when considering that it debates a
controversial issue while potentially not affecting just one, but every
single Wikipedia. After an initial and sustained burst which saw at least
several edits a day we are currently in a state where 21 edits were made by
7 unique users over the past three weeks or so. I wouls equally point out
that, 24 hours after new questions have been posted only two users have
actually reacted to them (Myself and DGG). Compare that to the huge amount
of reactions that were posted after the initial notification on June 22, or
to the current the huge amount of reactions the current straw
pending revisions is currently generating on the English Wiki.
Ill be a tad blunt about two issues i see:
1) This investigation needs momentum, and a boost if the momentum seems to
go down. Once the discussion seems to reduce to a trickle it is probably
best to move to the next fase, rather then waiting a fairly long time while
people forget.
2) I cannot shake the nagging feeling that i debated the same, or similar
questions at least several times, which reduces my interest in debating them
again (Telling the same story 10 times grows boring after all).
Last, a single point that just occured to me - where is this study
advertised? The foundation-l mailing list is mostly English, which means
that some of the other language Wikipedians may not be subscribed, nor be
able to read it or discuss it even if they wished to. To hook into question
4. a bit - if we aren't notifying non-english speaking Wikipedians and
conducting the entire discussion in English, aren't we excluding certain
groups on the basis of language?
~Excirial
2010/8/24 Delphine Ménard <notafishz(a)gmail.com>
Robert,
For what it's worth and for the record, I want to thank you for
sharing your thoughts and findings about this process on this list,
it's a fantastic positive and constructive example of "transparency"
as I understand and value it.
Bon courage,
Cheers,
Delphine
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 4:05 PM, R M Harris <rmharris(a)sympatico.ca> wrote:
Robert Harris here again, the consultant looking at the
issues surrounding controversial content on Wikimedia projects. I wanted
first
of all to thank all of you who have taken the
trouble to once again weigh
in on
a subject I know has been debated many times
within the Wikimedia
community. It
has been very valuable for me, a newcomer to
these questions, to witness
the
debate first-hand for several reasons. The first
is to remind me of the
thinking behind various positions, rather than simply to be presented
with the
results of those positions. And the second is as
a reminder to myself to
remember my self-imposed rule of "do no harm” and to reflect on how easy
it is to break that rule, even if unintentionally.
So far, the immediate result for me of the dialogue has been to recognize
that
the question of whether there is any problem to
solve at all is a real
question
that will need a detailed and serious response,
as well as a recognition
that
the possibility of unintended consequence in
these matters is high, so
caution
and modesty is a virtue.
Having said that, I will note that I'm convinced that if there are
problems
to
be solved around questions of controversial
content, the solutions can
probably
best be found at the level of practical
application. (and I’ll note that
several of you have expressed qualified confidence that a solution on
that
level may be findable). That's not to say
that the intellectual and
philosophical debate around these issues is not valuable -- it is
essential, in
my opinion. It's just to note that not only
is the "devil" in the
details as a few of you have noted, but that the "angel" may
be in the details as well -- that is -- perhaps -- questions insoluble on
the theoretical level may find more areas of agreement on a practical
level.
I'm not sure of that, but I'm presenting
it as a working hypothesis at
this
point.
My intended course of action over the next month or so is the following.
I'm
planning to actually write the study on a wiki,
where my thinking as it
develops, plus comments, suggestions, and re-workings will be available
for all to see. I was planning to begin that perhaps early in September.
(A
presentation to the Foundation Board is
tentatively scheduled for early
October). Between now and then, I would like to continue the kind of
feedback
I've been getting, all of it so valuable for
me. I have posted another
set of
questions about controversy in text articles on
the Meta page devoted to
the
study, (
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:2010_Wikimedia_Study_of_Controversial_C…)
because my ambit does not just
include images, and text and image, in my
opinion, are quite different
forms of
content. As well, I will start to post research
I've been collecting for
information and comment. I have some interesting notes about the
experience of public libraries in these matters (who have been struggling
with
many of these same questions since the time
television, not the Internet,
was
the world’s new communications medium), as well
as information on the
policies
of other big-tent sites (Google Images, Flickr,
YouTube, eBay,etc.) on
these
same issues. I haven't finished collecting
all the info I need on the
latter,
but will say that the policies on these sites are
extremely complex
(although
not always presented as such) and subject within
their communities to
many of
the same controversies that have arisen in ours.
We are not them, by any
means, but it is interesting to observe how they have struggled with many
of
the same issues with which we are struggling.
The time is soon coming when I will lose the luxury of mere
observation and research, and will have to face the moment where I will
enter
the arena myself as a participant in these
questions. I’m looking forward
to
that moment, with the understanding that you will
be watching what I do
with
care, concern, and attention.
Robert Harris
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
~notafish
NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get
lost.
Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive -
http://blog.notanendive.org
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: