headers
emijrp | 1 Dec 2010 01:03
Picon

Re: Ring of Gyges

Hi;

Most of the vandals are anonymous. But most of the anonymous are not
vandals. Those who use anonymity for bad purposes are cowards.

And anonymity is not modern or an invention of the Internet age. Writers
have used it during centuries[1], for publishing contain anonymously or
under pseudonyms.

Regards,
emijrp

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarillo_de_Tormes

2010/12/1 George Herbert <george.herbert@...>

> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Ryan Lomonaco <wiki.ral315@...>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:26 PM, David Gerard <dgerard@...> wrote:
> >
> >> For added self-referentiality, you can't read this article unless you
> >> identify yourself to the NYT.
> >>
> >
> > I was able to read the article without registering - it's worth noting
> that
> > the NY Times has a rather interesting version of a paywall, where only a
> > handful of people who visit the article are required to register or log
> in.
> > So it leads to confusion when you send a link to 100 people, and, say, 15
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Peel | 1 Dec 2010 01:08

Re: Ring of Gyges


On 30 Nov 2010, at 23:53, George Herbert wrote:

> Two, nearly all WP users use pseudonymity rather than real names, and
> for most people not having their real name attached anywhere gives
> them a sense of anonymous empowerment similar to the truly anonymous
> trolls seen elsewhere.  We see a lot of behavioral problems that are,
> to anyone who studies interpersonal communications online, extremely
> common.  People don't inherently humanize other pseudonyms; they don't
> feel that they'll necessarily be held accountable in the same way they
> would in real life for behavior, etc.  Coupled with the inherent
> degraded emotional communications in text-based communications, we
> have a lot of the same behavior even with persistent pseudonyms.  And
> you can see a lot of that, where a pseudonym account gets sufficiently
> bad community karma on WP and they go and sockpuppet off and create
> another one, not caring about the underlying issue their behavior
> raised.  That sort of thing is not unheard of in the real world, but
> it's generally felt to be the domain of scam artists and private
> investigators and the like; at the very least, socially dubious.

I guess I'm one of the few that contributes under my real name.

One of the options coded into MediaWiki is to submit a real name for attribution at the same time as
registering (i.e. you specify both a pseudonym and a real name). By default, this is on when you use a
non-Wikimemedia install of MediaWiki. However, within Wikimedia this is always turned off. I've
wondered for a long time why this is - can anyone provide an insight into the decision to disable this?

Thanks,
Mike
_______________________________________________
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
MZMcBride | 1 Dec 2010 01:45

Re: should not web server logs (of requests) be published?

Ryan Lomonaco wrote:
> Enough, everyone.  I don't think anyone knows what the hell this
> conversation is about anymore.  I certainly don't.
> 
> WJhonson is on moderation for the time being.

MZMcBride wrote:
> And, yes, I'll agree that the few times software moderation has
> been used on this list, it's been done poorly.

Thank you for keeping the tradition alive.

The phrase you're looking for is, "An ounce of prevention is a pound of
cure." Either be an active part of this mailing list and moderate as
appropriate or give up the damn post already. The current system is clearly
and desperately ineffective.

MZMcBride

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
WJhonson | 1 Dec 2010 01:47
Picon
Favicon

Re: should not web server logs (of requests) be published?

In a message dated 11/30/2010 4:46:02 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
z <at> mzmcbride.com writes:

> The phrase you're looking for is, "An ounce of prevention is a pound of
> cure." Either be an active part of this mailing list and moderate as
> appropriate or give up the damn post already. The current system is 
> clearly
> and desperately ineffective.
> 
> MZMcBride
> 

Yes I agree.  It's pointless to actually allow people to speak freely, when 
you can easily silence your critics by stuffing a sock in their mouth.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ryan Lomonaco | 1 Dec 2010 02:37
Picon

Moderation (was: should not web server logs (of requests) be published?)

Spinning off the moderation discussion to its own thread.

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:45 PM, MZMcBride <z <at> mzmcbride.com> wrote:

> The phrase you're looking for is, "An ounce of prevention is a pound of
> cure." Either be an active part of this mailing list and moderate as
> appropriate or give up the damn post already. The current system is clearly
> and desperately ineffective.
>

I agree that we probably should have stepped up and put a halt to things
earlier.  For my part, I didn't check my e-mail for the last 36 hours or so;
I read the first part of the discussion Sunday night, and checked back a few
hours ago.  That said, we have lives beyond moderating this list.  I would
not be opposed to adding another active moderator to help out, but a few
months ago, when we actively sought additional moderators, I was seriously
underwhelmed by the number of people who volunteered.

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:47 PM, <WJhonson@...> wrote:

> Yes I agree.  It's pointless to actually allow people to speak freely, when
> you can easily silence your critics by stuffing a sock in their mouth.

We have a fundamental disagreement, then, as to the point of moderation.  To
me, moderation is not to stuff a sock in anyone's mouth, it's to improve the
quality of discussion by adding a gate-keeper for those users who need one.
While Will has made quality posts to the list, he's also made posts that
have hurt discussion, both in the last few days and previously.  Note that
his comments in that thread led the discussion quickly off the topic of
releasing server logs (which was an interesting discussion, in my opinion)
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Chad | 1 Dec 2010 04:19
Picon

Re: Moderation (was: should not web server logs (of requests) be published?)

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Ryan Lomonaco <wiki.ral315 <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> - Non-moderators should feel free to take a more active role in cooling down
> discussions.  Moderators can't watch the list 24/7, and just one post
> imploring a few heated participants to think before they hit "send" can be
> very helpful.
>

I'm hardly a frequent poster here these days. I mostly just lurk on
this list so I can keep somewhat abreast of things that are going
on. However, as a longtime participant, this strikes me as a fairly
useless idea.

The thought has crossed my mind from time to time to jump in and
say "hey guys, let's cool it with the ad hominems and get back to
point A/B" (probably in a slightly more sarcastic manner, as is my
style) But then I end up trashing the draft and saying to myself
"Why bother? I'm just going to be shouted down or called a troll."

I'm also pretty sure I'm speaking for a not-insignificant number of
people who are subscribed but who rarely (if ever) post.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Birgitte SB | 1 Dec 2010 04:25
Picon
Favicon

Re: Moderation (was: should not web server logs (of requests) be published?)


----- Original Message ----
> From: Ryan Lomonaco <wiki.ral315@...>
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@...>
> Sent: Tue, November 30, 2010 7:37:17 PM
> Subject: [Foundation-l] Moderation (was: should not web server logs (of 
>requests) be published?)
> 
>
> 
> - Non-moderators should feel free to take a more active role  in cooling down
> discussions.  Moderators can't watch the list 24/7, and  just one post
> imploring a few heated participants to think before they hit  "send" can be
> very helpful.
> 

My last message to Will was not the best I could have sent.  I rushed it off as 
I was finishing a continually interrupted lunch with only two drafts.  I have 
found that nearly every single message that I have sent here which has 
noticeably provoked others or escalated a thread has been one I did not spend 
much time on.  Of course I think they are perfectly good when I send them.  I am 
quite fond of what I come with to say and I *always* initially think everything 
I write is clever and calm. But if give myself enough time for that first blush 
of vanity to fade, I will usually drastically rewrite my draft. Most of the time 
I draft a message four or five times. A particularly long message either sits 
overnight or through a commute.  And for every four times I hit reply and start 
to write I probably only send three emails or else cut out 80% of the early 
draft.  Sometimes it only take three sentences and sometime three drafts before 
I realize there no helpful way for me to respond to something. But generally 
speaking it is hard to hold on to a bad idea for very long without recognizing
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
KIZU Naoko | 1 Dec 2010 08:47
Picon

Re: Moderation (was: should not web server logs (of requests) be published?)

I love your recent message, Birgitte, it was well written and
thoughtful. On the other hand I'm doubtful it worked to cool down
those who got involved: some may have taken it to lose his face, or
not. Things may sometimes work weirdly, out of control and original
intention.

Not saying the best, but other way of attempt to cool down is to speak
off-list. Heuristically it works often. Not always, though. There
would be no snake oil.

After I mentioned Wikimedia troll, Will thought it meant him and sent
me some mails. I told him it was an in-joke (Bostonian Maniacs may
remember that) but not further. Besides annotation to a joke is dull,
apparently he was caught in a bad faith and no further words might
work I foresaw.

Not only ban but also moderation shouldn't be taken lightly. I think
however our moderator acted rightly in this case. Hope this moderation
works to a good direction as intended.

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Ryan Lomonaco <wiki.ral315@...>
>> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l@...>
>> Sent: Tue, November 30, 2010 7:37:17 PM
>> Subject: [Foundation-l] Moderation (was: should not web server logs (of
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Przykuta | 1 Dec 2010 12:39
Picon
Favicon

Fundraiser statistics

Hmm. We need change strategy. Banners work well, but without changes - you know.

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics

przykuta

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 12 comments |
headers
KIZU Naoko | 1 Dec 2010 13:39
Picon

Re: Fundraiser statistics

Time to use community input? There have been lots of suggestions and
ideas on banners on eta...

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Przykuta <przykuta@...> wrote:
> Hmm. We need change strategy. Banners work well, but without changes - you know.
>
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics
>
> przykuta
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@...
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--

-- 
KIZU Naoko / 木津尚子
member of Wikimedians in Kansai  / 関西ウィキメディアユーザ会 http://kansai.wikimedia.jp

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane