[WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
According to our article [[Facepalm]], this is a startrek internet meme
indicating an expression of embarrassment, frustration, disbelief, disgust,
shame or general woe. It often expresses mockery or disbelief of perceived
idiocy.
Well, that must be right.
Given that, I am wondering why we tolerate a template {{facepalm}}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Facepalm
This does nothing to foster civil discourse among Wikipedians. I've just
looked through how it is being used, and whilst I do see the occasional use
in self-deprecation, generally it is used as a shorthand put-down:
implicitly calling your correspondent an idiot, and his latest contribution
self-evidently moronic.
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still nevertheless delete
{{jackass}} or {{moron}}. If people are going to mock others, we shouldn't
be giving them shortcuts to do so. The existence of the template serves to
legitimise such dismissive discourse.
Thoughts?
Scott
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On 3 October 2011 11:02, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still nevertheless delete
{{jackass}} or {{moron}}. If people are going to mock others, we shouldn't
be giving them shortcuts to do so. The existence of the template serves to
legitimise such dismissive discourse.
Thoughts?
Sounds reasonable on civility grounds. You could probably get a TFD to fly.
- d.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On 3 October 2011 11:02, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
According to our article [[Facepalm]], this is a startrek internet meme
indicating an expression of embarrassment, frustration, disbelief,
disgust,
shame or general woe. It often expresses mockery or disbelief of perceived
idiocy.
Well, that must be right.
Given that, I am wondering why we tolerate a template {{facepalm}}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Facepalm
This does nothing to foster civil discourse among Wikipedians. I've just
looked through how it is being used, and whilst I do see the occasional use
in self-deprecation, generally it is used as a shorthand put-down:
implicitly calling your correspondent an idiot, and his latest contribution
self-evidently moronic.
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still nevertheless delete
{{jackass}} or {{moron}}. If people are going to mock others, we shouldn't
be giving them shortcuts to do so. The existence of the template serves to
legitimise such dismissive discourse.
Thoughts?
{{facepalm}} (sorry... couldn't resist ;))
I bet any TFD goes off the rails...
On the one hand the template does have somewhat negative connotations. On
the other hand it always stuck me as a slightly less confrontational way of
saying that's stupid. *shrug*
Tom
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
I wouldn't judge it on the connotations, I'd judge it on the use. Self
deprecatory such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Richard_Winters is
fine.
Some of the other times it has been used are more troubling, but is it any
worse than some of the intemperate language we sometimes see? I'd prefer
that we keep it and try to resolve the conflicts rather than the symptoms of
those conflicts.
WereSpielChequers
On 3 October 2011 11:07, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 3 October 2011 11:02, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
According to our article [[Facepalm]], this is a startrek internet meme
indicating an expression of embarrassment, frustration, disbelief,
disgust,
shame or general woe. It often expresses mockery or disbelief of
perceived
idiocy.
Well, that must be right.
Given that, I am wondering why we tolerate a template {{facepalm}}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Facepalm
This does nothing to foster civil discourse among Wikipedians. I've just
looked through how it is being used, and whilst I do see the occasional
use
in self-deprecation, generally it is used as a shorthand put-down:
implicitly calling your correspondent an idiot, and his latest
contribution
self-evidently moronic.
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still nevertheless delete
{{jackass}} or {{moron}}. If people are going to mock others, we
shouldn't
be giving them shortcuts to do so. The existence of the template serves
to
legitimise such dismissive discourse.
Thoughts?
{{facepalm}} (sorry... couldn't resist ;))
I bet any TFD goes off the rails...
On the one hand the template does have somewhat negative connotations. On
the other hand it always stuck me as a slightly less confrontational way of
saying that's stupid. *shrug*
Tom
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
Now on TFD, suggest we take it there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_Oct
ober_3#Template:Facepalm
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David Gerard
Sent: 03 October 2011 11:05
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On 3 October 2011 11:02, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient
and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still nevertheless
delete
{{jackass}} or {{moron}}. If people are going to mock others, we
shouldn't
be giving them shortcuts to do so. The existence of the template
serves to
legitimise such dismissive discourse.
Thoughts?
Sounds reasonable on civility grounds. You could probably get a TFD to
fly.
- d.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Scott MacDonald
doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still nevertheless delete
{{jackass}} or {{moron}}. If people are going to mock others, we shouldn't
be giving them shortcuts to do so. The existence of the template serves to
legitimise such dismissive discourse.
Template:Jackass exists as a navigational template for the show.
Carcharoth
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
Usually when I facepalm it's because I have a moment, not someone
else...
I believe [[WP:DICK]] is a bigger issue than {{facepalm}} at the moment
Bob
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Scott MacDonald
doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still nevertheless delete
{{jackass}} or {{moron}}. If people are going to mock others, we
shouldn't
be giving them shortcuts to do so. The existence of the template serves
to
legitimise such dismissive discourse.
Template:Jackass exists as a navigational template for the show.
Carcharoth
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Rob Schnautz
Sent: 03 October 2011 19:25
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
Usually when I facepalm it's because I have a moment, not someone
else...
I believe [[WP:DICK]] is a bigger issue than {{facepalm}} at the
moment
Bob
Dick has a didactic point - facepalm has none.
I've never understood people's problem with WP:DICK.
Scott
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Scott MacDonald wrote: I've never understood people's problem with WP:DICK. Because invokin g it is equivalent to calling the other person a dick. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On 3 October 2011 13:06, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote: On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Scott MacDonald wrote: I've never understood people's problem with WP:DICK. Because invoking it is equivalent to calling the other person a dick. One of the fun things we wrote into the policy right from the start was that invoking it was reflexively wrong, so really people shouldn't (barring extreme circumstances). It's primarily foundational (or constitutional) policy from which other merely high-level policies spring (e.g. No Personal Attacks; Don't Revert, Discuss; Consensus Can Change, etc.). If you find examples of people invoking it against others, you should take that to AN/I or a similar venue as it's generally a violation of NPA. ArbCom citing it in a case doesn't count, obviously. J. -- James D. Forrester jdforres...@wikimedia.org | jdforres...@gmail.com [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On 3 October 2011 15:37, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikiped...@gmail.com wrote: Wait, so someone pulling [[WP:DICK]] on someone else is something I can take to Arbcom? Arbcom is gonna be pretty busy if I start reporting every time I see it doneand I can't see it going very far with Arbcom or with AN/Iconsidering how many people back it as one of the three most important principles of Wikipedia-- which I disagree with entirely When we founded ArbCom it was entirely with user disputes in mind. I'd be disappointed and surprised if poor user behaviour wasn't dealt with by the current Committee, but if you don't do anything about it and call people on their poor behaviour when you see it, it'll never improve. J. -- James D. Forrester jdforres...@wikimedia.org | jdforres...@gmail.com [[Wikipedia:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
Wait, so someone pulling [[WP:DICK]] on someone else is something I can take to Arbcom? Arbcom is gonna be pretty busy if I start reporting every time I see it doneand I can't see it going very far with Arbcom or with AN/Iconsidering how many people back it as one of the three most important principles of Wikipedia-- which I disagree with entirely Bob On 10/3/2011 3:11 PM, James Forrester wrote: On 3 October 2011 13:06, Ken Arromdeearrom...@rahul.net wrote: On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Scott MacDonald wrote: I've never understood people's problem with WP:DICK. Because invoking it is equivalent to calling the other person a dick. One of the fun things we wrote into the policy right from the start was that invoking it was reflexively wrong, so really people shouldn't (barring extreme circumstances). It's primarily foundational (or constitutional) policy from which other merely high-level policies spring (e.g. No Personal Attacks; Don't Revert, Discuss; Consensus Can Change, etc.). If you find examples of people invoking it against others, you should take that to AN/I or a similar venue as it's generally a violation of NPA. ArbCom citing it in a case doesn't count, obviously. J. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
James Forrester wrote: On 3 October 2011 15:37, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikiped...@gmail.com wrote: Wait, so someone pulling [[WP:DICK]] on someone else is something I can take to Arbcom? Arbcom is gonna be pretty busy if I start reporting every time I see it doneand I can't see it going very far with Arbcom or with AN/Iconsidering how many people back it as one of the three most important principles of Wikipedia-- which I disagree with entirely When we founded ArbCom it was entirely with user disputes in mind. I'd be disappointed and surprised if poor user behaviour wasn't dealt with by the current Committee, but if you don't do anything about it and call people on their poor behaviour when you see it, it'll never improve. J. That's an entirely different proposition from merely being vindictive for its own sake, which seems to be the current modus operandi of ArbCom. Calling people on their poor behaviour may be a function of ArbCom, but only when all other avenues have been exhausted, including RfC, and only when there is no plausible route to rehabilitation, including (but not limited to) friendly advice, a break from adminning to recover from the stress (which, to be honest, might well include death threatson one's own Talk page), or even a temporary desysop in the interests of the admin. Tell me, when did ArbCom last take that position, and actually realise that volunteering to improve Wikipedia, whether by adding content, or dealing with vandalism, or otherwise applying WP policies, is to be appreciated rather than castigated? Clue:Never, in my experience, and certainly not recently. ArbCom is a ramshackle, unaccountable shed, which should be torn down and rebuilt from scratch, if not cast permanently into the not fit for purpose dustbin. It's a disgrace as it is now. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On 3 October 2011 16:06, Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net wrote: On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Scott MacDonald wrote: I've never understood people's problem with WP:DICK. Because invokin g it is equivalent to calling the other person a dick. Every day, I see perfectly civil people facepalming. I have yet to see a civil person turn to someone in public and say Don't be a dick. I think perhaps some peoples' civility radar is somewhat out of tune. Risker/Anne ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
