David Gerard wrote:
On 11 August 2015 at 00:10, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
I'm curious which comparable organizations you're referring to.
Pretty much any open source project with an organisation. You've already been referred to e.g. the Geek Feminism wiki on this point, so if you haven't read up there already then it comes across as sealioning to ask yet another person the same question.
I didn't ask yet another person, I asked the person who shouted that everyone else has already inexpensively solved this issue. Is there a similarly derogatory phrase that I can use for you to describe your behavior of pointing to an entire wiki as an "answer" to a question?
it's been pointed out by multiple people in this thread already that we're after a change in behaviour rather than more text, so you bringing this up again this late comes across as "I didn't hear that".
I've been mostly keeping up with the talk page discussion on mediawiki.org. I think this quote nicely sums up my feelings: "My experience with mw and wikimedia development as a whole has been such that these areas have overall come across as far more civil than most 'content' projects I've interacted with, and yet the latter tended to have policies out the wazoo." Our actual experience, hard-earned over time, makes it pretty clear that having a lot of policies doesn't address behavioral issues (and I think you and I agree on that).
Regarding "this late," this thread is less than a week old, so I honestly have no idea what the hell you're talking about there. Is it really too late to suggest that one of the _dozens_ of similar pages that we already have might fill the same niche as this proposed code of conduct?
MZMcBride