[Foundation-l] Moderation and this list

[GerardM]

Hoi Dan,
Foundation-l the mailing list about what transcends individual projects of
the Wikimedia Foundation. To start with you are apparently at the wrong
address. There is a specific list for the English language Wikipedia, there
is a list for what brings the Wikipedias together..

Foundation-l is not a refuge for what ails other lists. Now I am not
suggesting that you should be moderated, but I do insist that foundation-l
is not to be associated with encyclopaedias. That is not what this list is
about. By the way there is no need to moderate wiktionary-l .. :)

When you equate "legitimate criticism" with Wikipedia, arbitration cabals,
all people who "criticise" on this list need to appreciate that they are
wrong. Wrong, because this is not what this list is there for.

Thanks,
     GerardM

On Dec 21, 2007 6:32 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjester at gmail.com> wrote:

> Foundation-l, the mailing list nobody can edit for the encyclopedia
> everyone can?
>
> If we're going to get on the topic of censoring mailing lists, we
> should deal with Wiki-en-l first, THEN foundation-l. Most of what I
> see on foundation-l is constructive criticism, and inspired debate
> with a few snide remarks, not straight trolling attempts. Moderating
> this list would serve the effect of censoring legitimate criticism by
> allowing it to be subjected to a "judgment call" by the list
> moderators before being approved. You want to see a REAL cesspool,
> spend some time at Wiki-en-l; after that this list smells like roses.
>
> -Dan
> On Dec 21, 2007, at 12:25 PM, Andrew Whitworth wrote:
>
> >> I have to say that I agree with Birgitte here.  For me, Foundation-
> >> l has
> >> becoming incresasingly useless as a mailing list because it is so
> >> frequently dominated by people who seem to be very "bitter and
> >> mean-spirited" to the point that they are on the attack no matter
> >> what
> >> happens.
> >
> > So ignore them, block them, ban them, etc. If there are people whose
> > mean-spiritedness is preventing us from conducting legitimate business
> > here, or is preventing this list from being a useful resource, those
> > people should be removed from it. It is not anybody's duty or
> > responsibility to "put up" with people who are unhelpful,
> > unproductive, and even counter-productive. This list has a purpose and
> > "empowering trolls" or "dealing with trolls" is not that purpose.
> >
> >> I am unsure what we should do about foundation-l.  It has become a
> >> sewer.  It is difficult to balance our very strong desire for an
> >> unmoderated forum where people can feel comfortable making strong
> >> criticisms (nothing wrong with that!) with a forum where trolls are
> >> exhausting a lot of good people and spreading misinformation due to
> >> the
> >> inability of others to keep up with the sheer volume of malice.
> >
> > I don't see why this list has to be "unmoderated". None of the wikis
> > are unmoderated, and some of them are very strictly moderated. Set
> > rules: legitimate users will follow them, trolls will not. This is not
> > to say that the rules need to be complicated, or strict, etc. The
> > rules may not even need to be explicit, set some moderators who have
> > good judgement and tell them that they will "know it when they see
> > it". Hell, it works for pornography in the US, it will work for trolls
> > on the mailinglist.
> >
> > I would also submit a small disagreement that this list has become a
> > "sewer", but it's effectiveness has certainly been limited
> > unnecessarily.
> >
> > --Andrew Whitworth
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>