[Wikipedia-l] "genetically unequiped" women

[Michael R. Irwin]

Lars Aronsson wrote:
> 
> Michael R. Irwin wrote:
> > internet kook, etc.
> 
> One small but very useful rule in critique is to criticize *actions*,
> not *persons*.
> 
> The assumption behind the critique must be that the person can change,
> regret his or her earlier actions, maybe even apologize, and improve.
> After that we will have to continue to deal with that person.  So we
> better start now to act *as if* we were already talking to the new
> and improved person, using past tense for the previous wrongdoings.
> 
> When Helga was invited to this list, I didn't see anybody holding that
> door to the future open.  I got the impression that she drowned in a
> flood of messages talking about her (not to her) as being an idiot.
> A person who lacks knowledge or insight can learn, but what can an
> idiot do?
> 
> The questions now is not what Helga did (she's banned, case closed),
> but instead: What can *we* learn from this?

I think that I have learned that many of our mailing list
suscribers do not embrace many of the etiquette, policies,
rules, orientation materials, etc.

Yet we (some of us) are demanding that erring individuals who 
are brought to the list's attention near instantly come into 
near perfect compliance or be banned.

I think we should begin a consensus building process or
modification and ratification process to bring the stated
rules and the actual enforcement procedures into some clear
congruence with the majority behavior and actions of 
the community.

Regards,
Mike Irwin