On 04/30/2010 03:28 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: Hi. Thanks for the comment. Just to be clear, we didn't completely ignore that comment, or any other; we've been going through the comments on phone meetings every week. We did, however, fail to respond to that one, which I'm sorry for. I'll make sure to bring these up next we talk. Going back through, out of 26 comments, I see 3 that didn't get replies, so I'll be sure to get those, too. Thanks. So i can be sure I understand, when you say "nowhere near ready for release", are you referring just to those 3 issues? I believe the question of speed there has mainly to do with labs, rather than Flagged Revs itself, and the other 2 points you mention are suggested UI improvements. From your phrasing, I take it you believe those UI changes are important enough to delay release? Thanks, William

William, You thanked Thomas three times in that e-mail. If I may say so, such courtesy is unwarranted, in light of the terseness of his most recent post. We're all volunteers, so colour me confused as to why people think head-biting will achieve anything. YMMV. Anthony

Seriously? Well, okay then. If that's what our grants are being spent on…

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Anthony &lt;wikiagk(a)googlemail.com&gt; wrote: Jeez, does it matter? If William's style is to deal with cranky comments by being as polite as possible and acknowledging people engaging in discussion, even if they're being jerks about it, well -- more power to him. That shouldn't have a darn thing to do with getting paid or not. Especially for someone who was calling someone else out for being rude, your message here is out of line. C'mon, people. I have met most of the people commenting in this thread in real life and therefore know y'all are over the age of majority -- so act like adults already. -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers <at> gmail.com *

On 04/30/2010 05:19 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: Ok. For what it's worth, I think you're creating a false dichotomy; the making of a point and the grace with which it's made are, in my experience, mostly unrelated. But that's your problem, not mine. You should keep in mind that it definitely takes me more time and more energy to deal with non-nice requests. It's like that for most consultants I know. So your preferred working style costs the foundation more and makes it a bit less likely that people with other options will choose to work with the foundation. The more community members eschew politeness, the stronger the effect. William

On 04/30/2010 05:37 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: It's not the quantity of words, but the choice of them. When I am dealing with a polite message, I can write a quick reply. With a prickly one, I have to do more drafts, so I can get past my first reaction, a mainly negative one, and produce something positive in tone and substance. I also need more time between messages, so that my irritation in one doesn't slop over onto some undeserving correspondent. As long as we're on the topic of etiquette, I find it frustrating when people pick out one particular bit to reply to and ignore the broader point. I add that only because I'm not sure if this was part of your intentional policy against niceness, or a more accidental sort. Hoping that is useful, William

(Sorry for top-posting: Blackberry.) I just want to add a brief note supporting what William's saying. Yes -- it definitely takes more time to respond to angry or hostile-seeming mails. Trust gets impaired, and so the respondent spends time trying to figure out whether the person's really angry, or just curt... maybe asking other people if they have any insight.... and then framing a very careful reply and rereading it for tone before hitting send. Essentially, it's just easier and faster to have open conversation if the tone is constructive all round. So yes: hostility costs money. One answer to that is F2F meetings. Spending in-person time together definitely builds trust and friendliness. Once we know each other as human beings, online interactions are faster, easier, with less friction. I for example have now met Thomas Dalton in person three or four times, which is good. I like him much more now than I used to :-) Thanks, Sue -----Original Message----- From: William Pietri &lt;william(a)scissor.com&gt; Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 18:23:13 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List&lt;foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org&gt; Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Flagged Protection update for April 29 On 04/30/2010 05:37 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: It's not the quantity of words, but the choice of them. When I am dealing with a polite message, I can write a quick reply. With a prickly one, I have to do more drafts, so I can get past my first reaction, a mainly negative one, and produce something positive in tone and substance. I also need more time between messages, so that my irritation in one doesn't slop over onto some undeserving correspondent. As long as we're on the topic of etiquette, I find it frustrating when people pick out one particular bit to reply to and ignore the broader point. I add that only because I'm not sure if this was part of your intentional policy against niceness, or a more accidental sort. Hoping that is useful, William _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Respect. If you can't, use private mail.