On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:14 AM, James Alexander jamesofur@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure I would say it like that (that they would simply stop responding at all) but I worry that the method at which discussion and criticism has developed is encouraging the growth of a culture where goes against the very thing we say we vocally fighting for. This is definitely not just a foundation-l thing and you're right to say it like that is a bit of a red herring and ignores the real issue... It is also something that I think has roots in all of the active aspects of the community.
James, this was a good post. We do need a more active focus on kindness, effective skepticism, and constructive criticism.
And I agree that the problem being expressed here (not MZM's comment about transparency, which is valid and should be considered separately) -- the universal trouble with people attacking one another and making public spaces feel unsafe -- affects many parts of the community.
The fact that we associate "active Wikipedia work" on en:wp with AN/I is indicative of the trend. That noticeboard is hardly relevant to the work of most editors, lingering on conflicts of various sorts.
So frequently whenever someone opens their mouth they get bitten, regardless of what is happening the tenants of assuming good faith are just thrown out the window.
This is where not having safe spaces to discuss what's going on limits transparency...
Maybe this is how I work but I feel like we want a culture where it is perfectly acceptable for someone to respond without all the data, for them to make mistakes and get corrected and have that debate and those arguments.
So do I.