[Foundation-l] Do we need a Code of Participation?

[Brian McNeil]

As an adjunct to this Wikinews is trying to hammer out some code of conduct
for our experimental comments pages, link below.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Comment_Space

Mike Godwin has cast an eye over this and says it is a good start, as a
related issue - and perhaps as the only project where we're inviting people
to be opinionated - this is perhaps deserving of some consideration too.

As a small project Wikinews has to work hard to encourage our readers to
become contributors. I personally think our experiment has - to date - been
a success. There have been very few cases of severe abuse of the Comments
namespace, but I believe the above comment space policy page needs fleshed
out a little and made an official policy sanctioned by the board.

Eloquence? Comments?


Brian McNeil.
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Platonides
Sent: 05 November 2007 23:40
To: foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Do we need a Code of Participation?

Brian McNeil wrote:
> I agree with Erik's suggestion that all existing accounts should have to
go
> through this process, but what if the principles are also listed every
time
> you do log in, or by session cookie every time you start an edit session?
> 
> 
> Brian.


I'm fine with having it as a set of principles you can put on your User 
page (it's probably the best way other people will see it), as a 
page-to-sign, yet another infobox or "get a star near your name on your 
user page if you agreed to this on your preferences".
Even optionally, it's an eay way for trolls abusing that you signed it.

Showing it every time you do X is only annoying. People which would need 
to do it won't pay attention. Some people still don't understand that 
when you send an edit you're publishing it under GFDL and it's noted on 
*every edit*. And people which wouldn't will be paying for it.  At last, 
the disjunctive is "to edit or not to edit", as geni said.
Making optional to join it, it has much more moral sense (even when 
you're bound to it by the community politics).


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l