Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
Thank you.
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Yes indeed, thank you. On Nov 5, 2015 10:36 AM, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
That's an interesting update. Thanks for sharing. -- Tito
On 5 November 2015 at 23:05, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Il giorno gio, 05/11/2015 alle 18.35 +0100, Quim Gil ha scritto:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
This is great news!
Just to understand, is it still present in MediaWiki but not active on Wikimedia sites or it not in the MediaWiki code anymore?
Laurentius
On 5 November 2015 at 10:14, Laurentius laurentius.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Just to understand, is it still present in MediaWiki but not active on Wikimedia sites or it not in the MediaWiki code anymore?
There was a patch merged which removed the protection level completely: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/251286/
Dan
\o/
A.
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Dan Garry dgarry@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 5 November 2015 at 10:14, Laurentius laurentius.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Just to understand, is it still present in MediaWiki but not active on Wikimedia sites or it not in the MediaWiki code anymore?
There was a patch merged which removed the protection level completely: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/251286/
Dan
-- Dan Garry Lead Product Manager, Discovery Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
great news, indeed!
Thanks to everyone involved during the different stages of this process for making this happen. :-)
Leila
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Asaf Bartov abartov@wikimedia.org wrote:
\o/
A.
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Dan Garry dgarry@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 5 November 2015 at 10:14, Laurentius laurentius.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
Just to understand, is it still present in MediaWiki but not active on Wikimedia sites or it not in the MediaWiki code anymore?
There was a patch merged which removed the protection level completely: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/251286/
Dan
-- Dan Garry Lead Product Manager, Discovery Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org
Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! https://donate.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Laurentius laurentius.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Just to understand, is it still present in MediaWiki but not active on Wikimedia sites or it not in the MediaWiki code anymore?
It never was in the MediaWiki code to begin with. It was just a particular configuration of a custom protection level, like the 'templateeditor' ("template protected") level on enwiki or the 'editeditorprotected' ("geschützt (nur Sichter)") level on dewiki.
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Laurentius laurentius.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Il giorno gio, 05/11/2015 alle 18.35 +0100, Quim Gil ha scritto:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
This is great news!
Just to understand, is it still present in MediaWiki but not active on Wikimedia sites or it not in the MediaWiki code anymore?
There is no code specific to "superprotect"; it's the exact same MediaWiki permissions/protection system that lets users in the 'sysop' group override the ability of anonymous or regular users to edit particular pages. Technically nothing has changed -- particular protection levels can be added and removed via configuration at any time if they are needed.
In other words -- ignore the superprotect red herring! Please look at the documentation of the product process and give feedback on that, it's much, MUCH more important:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process
-- brion
Brion Vibber wrote:
In other words -- ignore the superprotect red herring! Please look at the documentation of the product process and give feedback on that, it's much, MUCH more important:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process
Great news to read that "superprotection" is dead! Erik brought an invaluable amount of good to Wikimedia, but that mis-feature was unequivocally bad. Personally, I think it was more of an albatross than a red herring. ;-) Good riddance.
MZMcBride
Yay! Great news about Superprotect's scrapping, also really good to hear the direction of travel on the development process.
Chris On 5 Nov 2015 17:36, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
It's a great news to hear that superprotect is gone and the willingness of a better collaboration. It's a long-awaited move.
2015-11-05 20:03 GMT+01:00 Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com:
Yay! Great news about Superprotect's scrapping, also really good to hear the direction of travel on the development process.
Chris On 5 Nov 2015 17:36, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However,
we
still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays
at
the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster.
The
collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors.
Check
the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
At last it is gone. Great news. Looking forward.
Bodhisattwa On 6 Nov 2015 00:40, "Pierre-Selim" pierre-selim@huard.info wrote:
It's a great news to hear that superprotect is gone and the willingness of a better collaboration. It's a long-awaited move.
2015-11-05 20:03 GMT+01:00 Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com:
Yay! Great news about Superprotect's scrapping, also really good to hear the direction of travel on the development process.
Chris On 5 Nov 2015 17:36, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve
a
product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However,
we
still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays
at
the product deployment phase. We need to become better software
partners,
work together towards better products, and ship better features faster.
The
collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual
trust
and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2]
that
will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier
on
will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors.
Check
the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- Pierre-Selim _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Quim, you really made my day. :-)
Il 05/11/2015 18:35, Quim Gil ha scritto:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
Thank you for sharing the news, Quim.
Following Quim's announcement, there was also, for the first time since nearly 1,000 Wikimedians requested the Foundation address this issue in 2014,[1] a formal statement about it from the organization's leadership. Executive Director Lila Tretikov said today in the live-streamed, monthly Metrics & Activities meeting:
"We wanted to remove Superprotect. Superprotect set up a precedent of mistrust, and this is something it was really important for us to remove, to at least come back to the baseline of a relationship where we're working together, we're one community, to create a better process. To make sure we can move together faster, and to make sure everybody is part of that process, everybody is part of that conversation, and not just us at WMF."[2]
-Pete [[User:Peteforsyth]]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Letter_to_Wikimedia_Foundation:_Superprotect... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePV-7nhO-z0#t=18m50s
On 2015-11-05 18:35, Quim Gil wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Great, thank you, it is clearly a step in a good direction.
Cheers Yaroslav
Good riddance to a bad mistake. Hopefully the underlying causes of the MediaViewer conflict can be addressed before any other incidents of this nature occur.
Cheers, Craig On 06/11/2015 3:36 AM, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
There is a first draft of an updated Product Development Process [2] that will guide the work of the WMF Engineering and Product teams.[3] It stresses the need for community feedback throughout the process, but particularly in the early phases of development. More feedback earlier on will allow us to incorporate community-driven improvements and address potential controversy while plans and software are most flexible.
We welcome the feedback of technical and non-technical contributors. Check the Q&A for details.[4]
[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Superprotect [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering [4]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_Product_Development_Process/2015-11-05#Q....
-- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 05/11/15 17:35, Quim Gil wrote:
Superprotect [1] was introduced by the Wikimedia Foundation to resolve a product development disagreement. We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers.
Without Superprotect, a symbolic point of tension is resolved. However, we still have the underlying problem of disagreement and consequent delays at the product deployment phase. We need to become better software partners, work together towards better products, and ship better features faster. The collaboration between the WMF and the communities depends on mutual trust and constructive criticism. We need to improve Wikimedia mechanisms to build consensus, include more voices, and resolve disputes.
That's fantastic, represents a huge vote of confidence for the Wiki Way, and is a big move towards improving the relationship between the WMF and the community.
Thank you!
-- Neil
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Neil Harris neil@tonal.clara.co.uk wrote:
That's fantastic, represents a huge vote of confidence for the Wiki Way, and is a big move towards improving the relationship between the WMF and the community.
Just to keep things in perspective: the removal of superprotect (which is, granted, not the only action described) is a rather minor and only mildly positive step. Compare it to what should have happened: superprotect *should* have been removed a year ago along with a profuse apology acknowledging that it should never have been imposed in the first place. Instead, it's removed a year later with the remark that "We have not used it for resolving a dispute since. Consequently, today we are removing Superprotect from Wikimedia servers" (05/11/15 17:35, Quim Gil wrote). In other words, it wasn't removed because it shouldn't have been imposed in the first place, but merely because it wasn't used. Is it good that it was removed? Sure, it's better to have had it removed than not. But it's a cheap token gesture.
On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 8:04 AM, pi zero wn.pi.zero@gmail.com wrote:
In other words, it wasn't removed because it shouldn't have been imposed in the first place, but merely because it wasn't used. Is it good that it was removed? Sure, it's better to have had it removed than not. But it's a cheap token gesture.
I think you're adding meanings to where they are not present. The reasons for SP removal are not that it wasn't used. And just the fact that it wasn't used is irrelevant: there have been views that SP could be useful potentially in the future, etc., so that it should stay just in case.
I have been involved in a series of meaningful conversations with Lila and WMF staff, and we all eventually came to an agreement that any potential theoretical benefits do not prevail over the symbolic damage the very existence of this tool (not just its use) inflicts. My understanding is that this is the main reason for SP removal, not the fact that it was not used.
best,
dariusz "pundit"
Hi pi zero,
On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 2:04 PM, pi zero wn.pi.zero@gmail.com wrote:
it wasn't removed because it shouldn't have been imposed in the first place, but merely because it wasn't used.
I'm sorry if my wording could suggest this interpretation. I just wanted to provide basic information about Superprotect to the many people that have heard about it but in fact didn't know much about its use today. This is also why the Q&A included more details:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
The main reason to act upon Superprotect now is the updated product development process https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process in the drafts, which we want to discuss and agree with the communities. This new process should make Superprotect unnecessary; removing it upfront was a logical step.
I have added these points in the Q&A:
Why is Superprotect being removed? https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
Why is the WMF doing this now? https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
I hope this clarifies that sentence.
On Nov 8, 2015 9:34 PM, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
the Q&A included more details:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
The main reason to act upon Superprotect now is the updated product development process https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process in the drafts, which we want to discuss and agree with the communities. This new process should make Superprotect unnecessary; removing it upfront was a logical step.
I have added these points in the Q&A:
Why is Superprotect being removed?
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
Why is the WMF doing this now?
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
I hope this clarifies that sentence.
Referring to "misbehaviour" in this context is extremely offensive; the initial use of superprotect was not a response to "misbehaviour".
Thanks for the explanations. I always thought of the Superprotect function as a technical way to react in a social-legal space of tension. A discussion about the technical function is much less interesting than about the real issue, of how to improve the MediaWiki software with regard to the different needs of different actors (readers, contributors, maybe others).
Andy, would you mind to explain what to mean exactly with "offensive"?
Kind regards Ziko
2015-11-09 0:04 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
On Nov 8, 2015 9:34 PM, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
the Q&A included more details:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
The main reason to act upon Superprotect now is the updated product development process https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process in the drafts, which we want to discuss and agree with the communities. This new process should make Superprotect unnecessary; removing it upfront was a logical step.
I have added these points in the Q&A:
Why is Superprotect being removed?
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
Why is the WMF doing this now?
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
I hope this clarifies that sentence.
Referring to "misbehaviour" in this context is extremely offensive; the initial use of superprotect was not a response to "misbehaviour". _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Andy,
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
Referring to "misbehaviour" in this context is extremely offensive; the initial use of superprotect was not a response to "misbehaviour".
Changed for the more precise and descriptive term "irregular edits": https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=WMF_product_development_process%... .
On the "extremely offensive" part, let me explain why I typed "misbehavior" without aiming to offend anyone. That paragraph refers to a future context defined by the new development process. That sentence refers to a potential situation where the process has been followed and someone blocks it using their admin permissions. What the sentence wants to say is that, even if someone thinks such action is misbehavior, the solution is to let the admins handle the situation, not to use a tool controlled exclusively by the WMF. I'm sure we agree with this principle.
I wasn't trying to judge past events. It is the job of the administrators to judge whether an edit in a page editable only by admins is appropriate or not.
PS: if you find room for improvement in the Q&A, you can comment in the Talk page, or edit directly. Wiki business as usual.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org