Why bother? Good old William of Occam would have made a fantastic Wikimedian. You've got a simple, quick, and easy solution to a pretty bad problem. Why hesitate and go in for something more complicated? Don't understand the reason to overcomplicate. Or, alternatively, you could ban him from uploading any more politics-related images...
Honestly, though, if we get to the stage where 50 percent of one guy's picture gallery labels him as a Neo-Nazi - complete fringe theory -
Commons
need to learn something from enwiki and toughen up. There's a word for
that
we use at enwiki: POV-pushing. This is not acceptable and we don't really need any more bad press at the moment, not with Durova/!! all over the Register.
En.wikipedia has a lot more problems and disgruntled users than Commons ever has, and I don't believe it is purely due to size or reputation. We're more easy-going at Commons and we try to talk to and help people before clicking the block button and pissing them off - you'd be surprised how many times I've explained one point of policy to someone who would otherwise have been blocked for uploading copyvios or such after repeated warnings, and they realised a point they hadn't understood before and became decent contributors. Policy and copyright are hard to understand and blocking is not the way to educate people.
en.wp does not do things perfectly; and no, they aren't the perfect older sibling for the little ones to look up to. En.wp is more like the rebellious older sibling who became a rock star and wildly famous, but is also slowly killing itself with drugs and alcohol. Just because it makes a lot of money and has a lot of fans doesn't mean the little siblings should mimic its behaviour. --Ayelie (Editor at Large) ****** Could I ask for a retraction, please?
I've been keeping my head low for two weeks in the hopes that things would blow over. Yes, I'm in the Register now. And unfortunately in a couple of more mainstream news sources also. None of them contacted me for comment before running the story. And due to the way dispute resolution progressed I had no fair opportunity to present my side of events onsite, either.
I unblocked the editor as soon as I realized I was mistaken, apologized repeatedly, sought to make amends, invited scrutiny, and pledged improvements. What more can I do?
I'm not Essjay. I haven't lied about my credentials or misled any reporters. I've volunteered for Wikipedia for two years and 20,000 edits and handled some of the site's most difficult disputes. Please assume good faith.
This reads like an implication that I've sought this attention, and that I'm a substance abuser. None of that is true.
-Durova
On Dec 5, 2007 2:36 PM, Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com wrote:
Why bother? Good old William of Occam would have made a fantastic Wikimedian. You've got a simple, quick, and easy solution to a pretty
bad
problem. Why hesitate and go in for something more complicated? Don't understand the reason to overcomplicate. Or, alternatively, you could
ban
him from uploading any more politics-related images...
Honestly, though, if we get to the stage where 50 percent of one guy's picture gallery labels him as a Neo-Nazi - complete fringe theory -
Commons
need to learn something from enwiki and toughen up. There's a word for
that
we use at enwiki: POV-pushing. This is not acceptable and we don't
really
need any more bad press at the moment, not with Durova/!! all over the Register.
En.wikipedia has a lot more problems and disgruntled users than Commons ever has, and I don't believe it is purely due to size or reputation. We're more easy-going at Commons and we try to talk to and help people before clicking the block button and pissing them off - you'd be surprised how many times I've explained one point of policy to someone who would otherwise have been blocked for uploading copyvios or such after repeated warnings, and they realised a point they hadn't understood before and became decent contributors. Policy and copyright are hard to understand and blocking is not the way to educate people.
en.wp does not do things perfectly; and no, they aren't the perfect older sibling for the little ones to look up to. En.wp is more like the rebellious older sibling who became a rock star and wildly famous, but is also slowly killing itself with drugs and alcohol. Just because it makes a lot of money and has a lot of fans doesn't mean the little siblings should mimic its behaviour. --Ayelie (Editor at Large)
Could I ask for a retraction, please?
I've been keeping my head low for two weeks in the hopes that things would blow over. Yes, I'm in the Register now. And unfortunately in a couple of more mainstream news sources also. None of them contacted me for comment before running the story. And due to the way dispute resolution progressed I had no fair opportunity to present my side of events onsite, either.
I unblocked the editor as soon as I realized I was mistaken, apologized repeatedly, sought to make amends, invited scrutiny, and pledged improvements. What more can I do?
I'm not Essjay. I haven't lied about my credentials or misled any reporters. I've volunteered for Wikipedia for two years and 20,000 edits and handled some of the site's most difficult disputes. Please assume good faith.
This reads like an implication that I've sought this attention, and that I'm a substance abuser. None of that is true.
A retraction from me? I wasn't aiming my comments toward you whatsoever - I apologise profusely if it came across as such. I was replying to Moreschi's statement that "Commons should learn from the English wikipedia and toughen up". I certainly didn't mean to involve you in the matter and was not replying to the last sentence in which you were mentioned. Apologies again if my message seemed to indicate I was!
--Ayelie (Editor at Large)
On 05/12/2007, Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com wrote:
Why bother? Good old William of Occam would have made a fantastic Wikimedian. You've got a simple, quick, and easy solution to a pretty bad problem. Why hesitate and go in for something more complicated? Don't understand the reason to overcomplicate. Or, alternatively, you could ban him from uploading any more politics-related images...
Honestly, though, if we get to the stage where 50 percent of one guy's picture gallery labels him as a Neo-Nazi - complete fringe theory -
Commons
need to learn something from enwiki and toughen up. There's a word for
that
we use at enwiki: POV-pushing. This is not acceptable and we don't really need any more bad press at the moment, not with Durova/!! all over the Register.
En.wikipedia has a lot more problems and disgruntled users than Commons ever has, and I don't believe it is purely due to size or reputation. We're more easy-going at Commons and we try to talk to and help people before clicking the block button and pissing them off - you'd be surprised how many times I've explained one point of policy to someone who would otherwise have been blocked for uploading copyvios or such after repeated warnings, and they realised a point they hadn't understood before and became decent contributors. Policy and copyright are hard to understand and blocking is not the way to educate people.
en.wp does not do things perfectly; and no, they aren't the perfect older sibling for the little ones to look up to. En.wp is more like the rebellious older sibling who became a rock star and wildly famous, but is also slowly killing itself with drugs and alcohol. Just because it makes a lot of money and has a lot of fans doesn't mean the little siblings should mimic its behaviour. --Ayelie (Editor at Large)
Could I ask for a retraction, please?
I've been keeping my head low for two weeks in the hopes that things would blow over. Yes, I'm in the Register now. And unfortunately in a couple of more mainstream news sources also. None of them contacted me for comment before running the story. And due to the way dispute resolution progressed I had no fair opportunity to present my side of events onsite, either.
I unblocked the editor as soon as I realized I was mistaken, apologized repeatedly, sought to make amends, invited scrutiny, and pledged improvements. What more can I do?
I'm not Essjay. I haven't lied about my credentials or misled any reporters. I've volunteered for Wikipedia for two years and 20,000 edits and handled some of the site's most difficult disputes. Please assume good faith.
This reads like an implication that I've sought this attention, and that I'm a substance abuser. None of that is true.
Isn't this going slightly off-topic? Trying to stand on Essjay's shoulders while you're both drowning isn't going to save anyone. For what it's worth, I don't see how Essjay's actions were wrong - since we don't require any credentials to edit, it matters not whether he lied about having credentials that he didn't. He just played a game in trying to assume credibility he didn't have, at least he didn't harm anyone.
On 12/5/07, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/12/2007, Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com wrote:
Why bother? Good old William of Occam would have made a fantastic Wikimedian. You've got a simple, quick, and easy solution to a pretty
bad
problem. Why hesitate and go in for something more complicated? Don't understand the reason to overcomplicate. Or, alternatively, you could
ban
him from uploading any more politics-related images...
Honestly, though, if we get to the stage where 50 percent of one guy's picture gallery labels him as a Neo-Nazi - complete fringe theory -
Commons
need to learn something from enwiki and toughen up. There's a word for
that
we use at enwiki: POV-pushing. This is not acceptable and we don't
really
need any more bad press at the moment, not with Durova/!! all over the Register.
En.wikipedia has a lot more problems and disgruntled users than Commons
ever
has, and I don't believe it is purely due to size or reputation. We're
more
easy-going at Commons and we try to talk to and help people before
clicking
the block button and pissing them off - you'd be surprised how many
times
I've explained one point of policy to someone who would otherwise have
been
blocked for uploading copyvios or such after repeated warnings, and they realised a point they hadn't understood before and became decent contributors. Policy and copyright are hard to understand and blocking
is
not the way to educate people.
en.wp does not do things perfectly; and no, they aren't the perfect
older
sibling for the little ones to look up to. En.wp is more like the
rebellious
older sibling who became a rock star and wildly famous, but is also
slowly
killing itself with drugs and alcohol. Just because it makes a lot of
money
and has a lot of fans doesn't mean the little siblings should mimic its behaviour. --Ayelie (Editor at Large)
Could I ask for a retraction, please?
I've been keeping my head low for two weeks in the hopes that things
would
blow over. Yes, I'm in the Register now. And unfortunately in a couple
of
more mainstream news sources also. None of them contacted me for
comment
before running the story. And due to the way dispute resolution
progressed
I had no fair opportunity to present my side of events onsite, either.
I unblocked the editor as soon as I realized I was mistaken, apologized repeatedly, sought to make amends, invited scrutiny, and pledged improvements. What more can I do?
I'm not Essjay. I haven't lied about my credentials or misled any reporters. I've volunteered for Wikipedia for two years and 20,000
edits
and handled some of the site's most difficult disputes. Please assume
good
faith.
This reads like an implication that I've sought this attention, and that
I'm
a substance abuser. None of that is true.
...at least he didn't harm anyone.
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com)
Lying does not harm anyone. Interesting.
Rob Smith
On 05/12/2007, Rob Smith nobs03@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/5/07, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/12/2007, Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com wrote:
Why bother? Good old William of Occam would have made a fantastic Wikimedian. You've got a simple, quick, and easy solution to a pretty
bad
problem. Why hesitate and go in for something more complicated? Don't understand the reason to overcomplicate. Or, alternatively, you could
ban
him from uploading any more politics-related images...
Honestly, though, if we get to the stage where 50 percent of one guy's picture gallery labels him as a Neo-Nazi - complete fringe theory -
Commons
need to learn something from enwiki and toughen up. There's a word for
that
we use at enwiki: POV-pushing. This is not acceptable and we don't
really
need any more bad press at the moment, not with Durova/!! all over the Register.
En.wikipedia has a lot more problems and disgruntled users than Commons
ever
has, and I don't believe it is purely due to size or reputation. We're
more
easy-going at Commons and we try to talk to and help people before
clicking
the block button and pissing them off - you'd be surprised how many
times
I've explained one point of policy to someone who would otherwise have
been
blocked for uploading copyvios or such after repeated warnings, and they realised a point they hadn't understood before and became decent contributors. Policy and copyright are hard to understand and blocking
is
not the way to educate people.
en.wp does not do things perfectly; and no, they aren't the perfect
older
sibling for the little ones to look up to. En.wp is more like the
rebellious
older sibling who became a rock star and wildly famous, but is also
slowly
killing itself with drugs and alcohol. Just because it makes a lot of
money
and has a lot of fans doesn't mean the little siblings should mimic its behaviour. --Ayelie (Editor at Large)
Could I ask for a retraction, please?
I've been keeping my head low for two weeks in the hopes that things
would
blow over. Yes, I'm in the Register now. And unfortunately in a couple
of
more mainstream news sources also. None of them contacted me for
comment
before running the story. And due to the way dispute resolution
progressed
I had no fair opportunity to present my side of events onsite, either.
I unblocked the editor as soon as I realized I was mistaken, apologized repeatedly, sought to make amends, invited scrutiny, and pledged improvements. What more can I do?
I'm not Essjay. I haven't lied about my credentials or misled any reporters. I've volunteered for Wikipedia for two years and 20,000
edits
and handled some of the site's most difficult disputes. Please assume
good
faith.
This reads like an implication that I've sought this attention, and that
I'm
a substance abuser. None of that is true.
...at least he didn't harm anyone.
-- Oldak Quill (oldakquill@gmail.com)
Lying does not harm anyone. Interesting.
Outside objective Abrahamic morality, lying doesn't always harm. It certainly doesn't harm anyone to make an inconsequential lie about background when nothing depends on that background.
Some of you may find [http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/culture-society/ this] interesting, though only tangentially related. -Mike.lifeguard
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org