I'm sure you could have put it another way then you did.
But to link to a discussion, then to say "you feel" like a fast one is being pulled, I think was improper. You may not have meant it, but it had the unintended effect of being in the back of my mind when I was evaluating the discussion. We have to be mindful that we do not canvass, directly or indirectly. We also have to be careful not to sully people unintentionally.
..."this one feels a little like an attempt to pull a fast one."
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pull_a_fast_one
Please consider your wording when linking discussion in the future on this list.
Best regards,
Mercury
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of doc Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 8:08 AM To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] A six-day roll-back poll?
NavouWiki wrote:
Doc,
That was really off the mark. Who is trying to pull a fast one? There
are
some very good contributors, so consider their good faith.
Merc
Sorry, I had a long IRC conversation with them and stressed my strong objections to the short length and Christmas timing of the poll. I stated that it felt manipulative, and pressed for a longer time period. They essentially saw my attempts to extend it as being attempts to wreck it. They were more interested in pressing the thing home, than waiting till people returned from their holidays to give their opinions. My good faith assuming was approaching exhaustion at that point (but still in with a shout).
Given the low level of involvement at that point (about 60 people in 5 of the 7 days they were allowing), I also suggested that THEY use the official mailing list to raise the profile of the discussion. Again I was rebuffed and told that engaging with the people who read the mailing list was quite pointless.
What finished off my assuming good faith was their reaction to my posting here. When they declined to do so, I posted here myself last night pointing people to the debate, and expressing my concerns over its timing - I did NOT give my view of the proposal itself. (And I told them I was intending on doing this.) I'd say my advertising was successful, as there's been dozens of new contributions on *both sides* of the debate in the last hours. However, I have been accused of canvasing, "inappropriate and deceptive" behaviour and various other personal attacks.
Where is their assumption of my good faith? Their overreaction to me publicising this rather serves to confirm my suspicion that this was an attempt to game the system.
Doc
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l