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 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Ryan Lomonaco <[email protected]> >> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <[email protected]> >> 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 > it for what it is. I imagine everyone has different thresholds for this and I > can't imagine that anyone contributes to this list so that they might have > platform on which to be a jerk. But if there is anyone who sends on every > message they begin to write in less than five minutes please consider that > either you should apply for sainthood or that some percentage of your messages > are contributing a problem here. It would be really nice if the percentage of > provocative messages could be lowered and I intend to try do my part in that. > > Birgitte SB > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > 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 [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
