Re: [admin] Re: [uf-discuss] inappropriate behaviour (was: Discussion of public domain declaration template usage)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Scott
Reynen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On Aug 1, 2007, at 1:02 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andy Mabbett
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Frankly Andy, due to your use of the {{subst}} method, you have
now added
additional time cost to determining if any page *you* edit in
particular is
consistently in the public domain or not with respect to all
other public
domain contributors.
Frankly, Tantek, that's bullshit.
I have just received an e-mail, from Frances Berriman, subject
Warning
of inappropriate behaviour on mf-discuss, citing the above
exchange of
26 July, in:
http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2007-
July/010261.html
and telling me that:
Such an outburst (sic) requires (sic) a warning that if you
cannot contribute with respect and in an appropriate tone
on the
mailing list, you will receive a cooling off ban.
Perhaps Ms Berriman isn't familiar with British English vernacular
(which would be odd, I understand she lives here), but Rubbish,
nonsense is in the Oxford English Dictionary, and means rubbish,
nonsense. In any case, that was no outburst; but a considered
and apt
description of the comment to which I was responding; and I stand
by it.
The microformats admins have decided to ban Andy Mabbet from this
community
I'm not sure who he is, but the post cited was mine, and I was blocked
from editing or posting. This after:
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Frances
Berriman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
If you feel that your response wasn't out of order, okay - feel free to
say so
What was I saying, about there being:
the impression that microformats fora are being run by an
unelected cabal, using arbitrary, personal interpretations of
vague and unwritten rules, applied with no sense of
even-handedness.
--
Andy Mabbett
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] inappropriate behaviour (was: Discussion of public domain declaration template usage)
On 8/3/07, Ben Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The informal approach worked well when the community was new and smaller, but now that it's ramping up it doesn't seem to be coping. I'm not claiming there's an easy answer, but we should start by accepting there's a problem. The IETF, that master of rough consensus and running code[1], is often sited as an example of a group that is good at lightweight standards development. And it is. But a closer look shows that lightweight process is not at all the same as no process whatsoever. A quick read through the home page for the The Internet Engineering Steering Group[2] shows that there is quite a lot of hard-won wisdom about how groups of grown-ups[3] cooperate to produce a standard. The IETF process is not without problems, and I'm not suggesting it's something that should be copied, but it is a good example of how some real governance is necessary even for a very results-focused group of engineers. FWIW. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rough_consensus [2] http://www.ietf.org/iesg.html [3] And/or prickly unsocialized prima donna engineers pretending to be grown-ups :-) -- Christopher St. John http://artofsystems.blogspot.com ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] inappropriate behaviour (was: Discussion of public domain declaration template usage)
To me, the issue was not about freedom of expression or lack thereof. It was about putting a damper on a bilious jackass attitude and behavior. I doubt the actual topic of discussion was in question. Yeah, we all could probably benefit from a good social behavior class (ok, I can't _really_ speak for everyone) , but personal insults, insinuations, and conspiracy-mongering are clearly out of line. :DG On 8/2/07, Ben Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Once again, there is the impression that microformats fora are being run by an unelected cabal, using arbitrary, personal interpretations of vague and unwritten rules, applied with no sense of even-handedness. Still, I suppose that's easier than actually addressing the governance and rights issues which I and others have raised. Apparently they travel in black helicopters too I don't think we should make light of this point. I've heard several people cite this impression as the reason they don't contribute to microformats. If we can't address the problem then I don't see how we can attract and retain active members. More than once I've observed unresolved discussions cut off with a post saying wiki updated, issue closed. So, why would someone take time out of their day to contribute to a discussion if they expect to be ignored? To put it another way, if the core group is going to do as it pleases regardless of community discussion, why are the rest of us here? The core group is not a defined/invited/elected group so it's not like a W3C discussion list, where people understand they are giving feedback but will not be involved in the final decision. The expectation was that everyone could contribute, but that's not how it actually feels. I am not trying to be troublesome, I am expressing a genuine concern about this community. I don't think it serves anyone's purpose to ignore what many people feel is true. The informal approach worked well when the community was new and smaller, but now that it's ramping up it doesn't seem to be coping. I'm not claiming there's an easy answer, but we should start by accepting there's a problem. cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] inappropriate behaviour (was: Discussion of public domain declaration template usage)
On 1/8/07 20:02, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Once again, there is the impression that microformats fora are being run by an unelected cabal, using arbitrary, personal interpretations of vague and unwritten rules, applied with no sense of even-handedness. Still, I suppose that's easier than actually addressing the governance and rights issues which I and others have raised. Apparently they travel in black helicopters too http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[admin] Re: [uf-discuss] inappropriate behaviour (was: Discussion of public domain declaration template usage)
On Aug 1, 2007, at 1:02 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andy Mabbett
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Frankly Andy, due to your use of the {{subst}} method, you have
now added
additional time cost to determining if any page *you* edit in
particular is
consistently in the public domain or not with respect to all
other public
domain contributors.
Frankly, Tantek, that's bullshit.
I have just received an e-mail, from Frances Berriman, subject
Warning
of inappropriate behaviour on mf-discuss, citing the above
exchange of
26 July, in:
http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2007-
July/010261.html
and telling me that:
Such an outburst (sic) requires (sic) a warning that if you
cannot contribute with respect and in an appropriate tone
on the
mailing list, you will receive a cooling off ban.
Perhaps Ms Berriman isn't familiar with British English vernacular
(which would be odd, I understand she lives here), but Rubbish,
nonsense is in the Oxford English Dictionary, and means rubbish,
nonsense. In any case, that was no outburst; but a considered
and apt
description of the comment to which I was responding; and I stand
by it.
The microformats admins have decided to ban Andy Mabbet from this
community (both email lists and wiki) for one week, due to continued
failure to adhere to the be nice guideline [1] after a private
warning.
[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists#Be_nice
Sincerely,
Scott Reynen
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] inappropriate behaviour (was: Discussion of public domain declaration template usage)
Once again, there is the impression that microformats fora are being run by an unelected cabal, using arbitrary, personal interpretations of vague and unwritten rules, applied with no sense of even-handedness. Still, I suppose that's easier than actually addressing the governance and rights issues which I and others have raised. Apparently they travel in black helicopters too I don't think we should make light of this point. I've heard several people cite this impression as the reason they don't contribute to microformats. If we can't address the problem then I don't see how we can attract and retain active members. More than once I've observed unresolved discussions cut off with a post saying wiki updated, issue closed. So, why would someone take time out of their day to contribute to a discussion if they expect to be ignored? To put it another way, if the core group is going to do as it pleases regardless of community discussion, why are the rest of us here? The core group is not a defined/invited/elected group so it's not like a W3C discussion list, where people understand they are giving feedback but will not be involved in the final decision. The expectation was that everyone could contribute, but that's not how it actually feels. I am not trying to be troublesome, I am expressing a genuine concern about this community. I don't think it serves anyone's purpose to ignore what many people feel is true. The informal approach worked well when the community was new and smaller, but now that it's ramping up it doesn't seem to be coping. I'm not claiming there's an easy answer, but we should start by accepting there's a problem. cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] inappropriate behaviour (was: Discussion of public domain declaration template usage)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes but Rubbish, nonsense is in the Oxford English Dictionary, and means rubbish, nonsense should read: but bullshit is in the Oxford English Dictionary, and means rubbish, nonsense for which I apologise. -- Andy Mabbett ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
