Marc, without denying or confirming there are problems with discourse
at Wikinews (because I have no personal knowledge), I would posit that
your messages about this topic to this list have been a little...
terse. Cary was proposing some perfectly valid thoughts (and money
DOES have to do with this problem... who do you think pays the
Foundation people that you want to swoop in from on high? They don't
work for beads, you know...) and you acted fairly aggressively towards
Slow down, take a deep breath, and think about detailing the issues
specifically, rather than some broad sweeping statement. Then, we as
a list can start to think through what we - the volunteers who make up
this particular list - can offer in the way of help (if anything).
I know you're frustrated. I bet I would be too. I'm just suggesting
that maybe there's another way to handle this...
On Feb 5, 2009, at 1:12 PM, Marc Riddell wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Marc Riddell wrote:
When will you people finally acknowledge that
there is something
wrong with the deteriorating level of discourse occurring in the
And this trend is certainly not confined to Wikinews. Take a good,
look at some of the dialogue occurring on the
English Wikipedia. The
atmosphere is becoming angrier and more hostile by the day.
And, Erik, when I broached this subject in a private email
> you, you never even acknowledged receipt of that email. What would
> you have
> done if we were speaking to each other in person - stare at me in
> That, alone, speaks volumes.
on 2/5/09 1:30 PM, Cary Bass at cary(a)wikimedia.org wrote:
First of all, Erik may or may not have received
your email, and the
reasons he did or did not respond to you can be immense and varied.
You should not make assumptions based on a lack of communication by
anyone, staff or community member.
This is an issue for Erik to respond to (or not); not for you to make
excuses for him.
Secondly, what gives you the impression that Foundation staff are
to sweep in and make everyone behave; or furthermore, why should you
not assume that we've not already tried some way to encourage
conviviality and discourage attacks.
I have personally found myself
in the predicament of trying to solve issues for people and getting
head bitten off by the very people I was trying to help!
This is not about solving specific issues for people; it is about
them how to civilly and constructively solve their own. Learn the
At least one
of those individuals resorted to calling me denigrating names on
lists cc'd to numerous folks, including coworkers, Jimmy Wales, and
boss; and his fellow complainants did nothing to object.
The Foundation, as successful as the last fundraiser went, remains to
having limited resources.
Oh, please, Cary, money has nothing to do with what I am talking
you should know it.
Our volunteering model is next to
impossible to define, given the enormity of our community.
This is purely an excuse for your inaction.
Discussions take place on IRC about the simple idea of removing admin
access to anyone who uses ugly or rude block messages. This idea is
met with huge opposition; by solid contributors.
"Solid" (whatever that is) contributors are objecting to ruling out
rude messages"!?! Time for a new definition of solidity.
people to stop acting like people.
No, I am asking that people work and communicate civilly and
with one another so that important matters can be resolved.
Perhaps we should follow the Wikinews discussion more closely...even
participate in it, rather than expanding it to include all of the
Foundation projects in one fell swoop. Given that the community is
much smaller there, a solution might take place that will result in
people being more proactive about reducing ugliness and being kinder
to one another and promoting an assumption of good faith.
Maybe Wikinews can even come up with a model that can be adopted by
It is clear that the Wikinews Project HAS come up with a successful
The question is: are the other Projects even listening?
foundation-l mailing list