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

David Gerard dgerard at gmail.com
Wed Nov 7 10:51:56 UTC 2007

On 07/11/2007, Waerth <waerth at asianet.co.th> wrote:
> Delirium wrote:

> > It's one thing to lay down a set of rules that everyone has to follow,
> > and quite another to make everyone stand up at the front of the class
> > like schoolchildren and recite a Pledge of Allegiance to Wikipedia and
> > the Principles We Hold Dear, which I won't do. People edit Wikipedia for
> > a variety of philosophical reasons, and I disagree strongly with
> > attempts to enforce cultural conformity, especially since they wouldn't
> > have the intended effect anyway---most people who "sign" will just click
> > through without reading, or "sign" even if they disagree since they
> > don't have a choice besides leaving. Even if I agreed with the
> > principles I wouldn't participate in such a degrading and offensive
> > exercise by "signing" them.

> I feel the same way about this as delirium does. I rather leave the
> projects then sign some kind of pledge. In my opinion this would only
> become one more argumentation pont in discussions. But you pledged this
> an this and this ... no according to me it is thism this and this etc etc

Indeed. The fundamental problem is that you can't write clues for the
clueless or clue-resistant.

Statements of principles only work for the clueful of good will,
because the clueless won't understand them and those of bad will won't
care. So trying to write rules against stupidity is deeply futile.

- d.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list