That can't be meant serious anymore. You first make a Board decision and then want to research how big the problem is or if it at all exists, after you already made the decision about the solution? The Board seems to act on a highly confused and amateur level ... it is not to understand anymore what is going on there.
On such a decision the Board should have before making any decision researched really what raeders expect and want and this with empathy for different regions and the understanding that germany maybe has different needs than the arabic room and that a making them all the same is not a good idea, and not empathic at all. Before a Board decision there would have been to be a poll that really ask the right questions, not this fake thing with no impact at all. The way the Board acted on this and now not even says "yes, we fucked it up, we take the decision back and start at point zero again" is a shame for teh complete Wikimedia world and community.
Second last point: Give back to the editors the responsibility to amke the choice how the can present their educational content to the readers. That is no Board decision. If a community says we don't need the filter, then the Board doesn't know any better about the needs and wishes of teh users of this project and shouldn't act into it this way.
Last point: The Board should start fisrt thinking and then deciding. It would reduce much the danger of splitting the communities an the Wikipedias. The Board seems a little bit too american, first shooting by feeling threatend and then asking ... That is not the way the Board should work. So act responsible and take back the decision until a really good decision process would have been made through ...
Julius Redzinski (de:Julius1990)
On 10.10.2011 13:24, wrote Ting:
Hello Fae,
thank you very much for pointing this out. Yes, I think you indeed hit the nail. We discussed this problem on our meeting and Sue provided some plans on how to work on this problem. I am normally reluctant to comment what the staff is doing or what they are planning to do, because this often can be seen as an intervening of the staff activity. But I think it is ok for me to spoil this a bit now: So Sue suggests a two step approach. In the first step we will only collect reader reactions on images, to see if there is a problem at all, how big is the problem, and where are the problems. And on a second step, when we have those data and can work out an understanding of it, then we can go on to work out dedicated solutions for the problems, as I said in my letter, together with the community.
Greetings Ting
On 09.10.2011 23:55, wrote Fae:
Hi Ting,
Thanks for explaining the position of the board in your own words. I appreciate the board is listening. I am concerned that you state that the board is acting from "belief", I recommend you consider how this can move to proposing a strategy based on facts and non-controversial analysis.
I suspect that any proposal for change will be strongly resisted and continue to divide our community until well understood and well communicated facts underpin the board's resolution rather than personal belief.
Cheers, Fae
Julius, I do understand your feelings (believe me: I do) but screaming and offend the board (Like call them "highly confused and amateur") will not help you in your cause.
I do understand your anger against the board and their decision (even because your wiki decided to NOT have the filter.) but I think is better to try solve that with discussion first, and after - as a last change - you can start a war if you want.
Please note that the board didn't said yet (and I hope they never say) that they will placed any filter in all wikis. I do agree that a statement saying they will not impose the filter in wikis who voted against (fr and de so far) would be better, but lest work with what we have now. _____ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/(351) 925 171 484
*Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.*
On 10 October 2011 13:00, Julius Redzinski julius.redzinski@hotmail.dewrote:
That can't be meant serious anymore. You first make a Board decision and then want to research how big the problem is or if it at all exists, after you already made the decision about the solution? The Board seems to act on a highly confused and amateur level ... it is not to understand anymore what is going on there.
On such a decision the Board should have before making any decision researched really what raeders expect and want and this with empathy for different regions and the understanding that germany maybe has different needs than the arabic room and that a making them all the same is not a good idea, and not empathic at all. Before a Board decision there would have been to be a poll that really ask the right questions, not this fake thing with no impact at all. The way the Board acted on this and now not even says "yes, we fucked it up, we take the decision back and start at point zero again" is a shame for teh complete Wikimedia world and community.
Second last point: Give back to the editors the responsibility to amke the choice how the can present their educational content to the readers. That is no Board decision. If a community says we don't need the filter, then the Board doesn't know any better about the needs and wishes of teh users of this project and shouldn't act into it this way.
Last point: The Board should start fisrt thinking and then deciding. It would reduce much the danger of splitting the communities an the Wikipedias. The Board seems a little bit too american, first shooting by feeling threatend and then asking ... That is not the way the Board should work. So act responsible and take back the decision until a really good decision process would have been made through ...
Julius Redzinski (de:Julius1990)
On 10.10.2011 13:24, wrote Ting:
Hello Fae,
thank you very much for pointing this out. Yes, I think you indeed hit the nail. We discussed this problem on our meeting and Sue provided some plans on how to work on this problem. I am normally reluctant to comment what the staff is doing or what they are planning to do, because this often can be seen as an intervening of the staff activity. But I think it is ok for me to spoil this a bit now: So Sue suggests a two step approach. In the first step we will only collect reader reactions on images, to see if there is a problem at all, how big is the problem, and where are the problems. And on a second step, when we have those data and can work out an understanding of it, then we can go on to work out dedicated solutions for the problems, as I said in my letter, together with the community.
Greetings Ting
On 09.10.2011 23:55, wrote Fae:
Hi Ting,
Thanks for explaining the position of the board in your own words. I appreciate the board is listening. I am concerned that you state that the board is acting from "belief", I recommend you consider how this can move to proposing a strategy based on facts and non-controversial analysis.
I suspect that any proposal for change will be strongly resisted and continue to divide our community until well understood and well communicated facts underpin the board's resolution rather than personal belief.
Cheers, Fae
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Julius Redzinski julius.redzinski@hotmail.de wrote:
On such a decision the Board should have before making any decision researched really what raeders expect and want and this with empathy for different regions and the understanding that germany maybe has different needs than the arabic room and that a making them all the same is not a good idea, and not empathic at all. Before a Board decision there would have been to be a poll that really ask the right questions, not this fake thing with no impact at all. The way the Board acted on this and now not even says "yes, we fucked it up, we take the decision back and start at point zero again" is a shame for teh complete Wikimedia world and community.
Second last point: Give back to the editors the responsibility to amke the choice how the can present their educational content to the readers. That is no Board decision. If a community says we don't need the filter, then the Board doesn't know any better about the needs and wishes of teh users of this project and shouldn't act into it this way.
Last point: The Board should start fisrt thinking and then deciding. It would reduce much the danger of splitting the communities an the Wikipedias. The Board seems a little bit too american, first shooting by feeling threatend and then asking ... That is not the way the Board should work. So act responsible and take back the decision until a really good decision process would have been made through ...
Julius Redzinski (de:Julius1990)
Please get one's breath and after answer me.
Which community? German community? Do you think that German community represent all users? because you are opposing "the community" to the board, elected by the community.
It means that this community is a little bit unstable because yesterday it elect a board and now it is fighting with it.
de.wikipedia.org is used by a lot of persons of different cultures, so does it mean that the German community is taking a decision for all of these users?
If the members of de.wikipedia.org are *unaffected by explicit sexual images* because there are already ahead as they practice bondage or BDSM, it doesn't mean that all person of the world are so evolute in sexual matters.
What the poll of de.wikipedia.org means is that the use of the filter should not be applied "automatically" and the community needs to be consulted. In this case the survey should be addressed to all persons and not only to the German ones.
After if de.wikipedia.org would impose to the world their decision, it seems to me logical that de.wikipedia.org will limit the use of their projects only to the countries where German language is spoken. to define them because German community is "the community") are assisting to this piece of theater. Please give us at least pop corns!
Ilario
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Julius Redzinski julius.redzinski@hotmail.de wrote:
On such a decision the Board should have before making any decision researched really what raeders expect and want and this with empathy for different regions and the understanding that germany maybe has different needs than the arabic room and that a making them all the same is not a good idea, and not empathic at all. Before a Board decision there would have been to be a poll that really ask the right questions, not this fake thing with no impact at all. The way the Board acted on this and now not even says "yes, we fucked it up, we take the decision back and start at point zero again" is a shame for teh complete Wikimedia world and community.
Second last point: Give back to the editors the responsibility to amke the choice how the can present their educational content to the readers. That is no Board decision. If a community says we don't need the filter, then the Board doesn't know any better about the needs and wishes of teh users of this project and shouldn't act into it this way.
Last point: The Board should start fisrt thinking and then deciding. It would reduce much the danger of splitting the communities an the Wikipedias. The Board seems a little bit too american, first shooting by feeling threatend and then asking ... That is not the way the Board should work. So act responsible and take back the decision until a really good decision process would have been made through ...
Julius Redzinski (de:Julius1990)
Please get one's breath and after answer me.
Which community? German community? Do you think that German community represent all users? because you are opposing "the community" to the board, elected by the community.
It means that this community is a little bit unstable because yesterday it elect a board and now it is fighting with it.
de.wikipedia.org is used by a lot of persons of different cultures, so does it mean that the German community is taking a decision for all of these users?
If the members of de.wikipedia.org are *unaffected by explicit sexual images* because there are already ahead as they practice bondage or BDSM, it doesn't mean that all person of the world are so evolute in sexual matters.
What the poll of de.wikipedia.org means is that the use of the filter should not be applied "automatically" and the community needs to be consulted. In this case the survey should be addressed to all persons and not only to the German ones.
After if de.wikipedia.org would impose to the world their decision, it seems to me logical that de.wikipedia.org will limit the use of their projects only to the countries where German language is spoken. to define them because German community is "the community") are assisting to this piece of theater. Please give us at least pop corns!
Ilario
The huge gap here is between "what we can reasonably do" and "we would like to do, but until hell freezes over, we don't really have the means to accomplish" It isn't a nice equation, but it is one we have to live with.
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
If the members of de.wikipedia.org are *unaffected by explicit sexual images* because there are already ahead as they practice bondage or BDSM, it doesn't mean that all person of the world are so evolute in sexual matters.
I find these sorts of comments personally offensive, likely to disrupt any forming consensus and appear to promote stereotypes. Please keep in mind the principle of conducting discussions in "respectful and civil manner" as one might expect if applying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:5P.
Should this list be hijacked by these sorts of comments then I see no point in staying subscribed to it.
Thanks, Fae
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Fae fae@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
If the members of de.wikipedia.org are *unaffected by explicit sexual images* because there are already ahead as they practice bondage or BDSM, it doesn't mean that all person of the world are so evolute in sexual matters.
I find these sorts of comments personally offensive, likely to disrupt any forming consensus and appear to promote stereotypes. Please keep in mind the principle of conducting discussions in "respectful and civil manner" as one might expect if applying http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:5P.
Should this list be hijacked by these sorts of comments then I see no point in staying subscribed to it.
Thanks, Fae
Do you see which kind of comments there are in this thread?
Do you think that this thread has been opened in a "civil and respectful manner"?
At least I have used a generic reference, someone here has give a *direct personal offense*, he is not really a person who can educate about civilization and respect.
Please be kind to apply the same measure for all comments.
Thank you
Ilario Valdelli
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org