Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-12 Thread Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l
If someone states that something is unclear, they very obviously intend “unclear” to apply to their perception of it. For example, I just used the words “very obviously.” That is my perception, my opinion, what I gathered from the information available to me. Should I note “it is my opinion

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-12 Thread Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
Hi, This has just been published on the Mozilla community blog by Emma Irwin and I thought it could interest some of you here. https://blog.mozilla.org/community/2020/09/10/weaving-safety-into-the-fabric-of-open-source/ It brings insight into the experience of enforcing a code of conduct in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Paul J. Weiss
To expand on the last part of my previous post, one of the things that Peter and other posters are doing that is problematic in my eyes is phrasing their opinions as fact. It is quite clear to me why Dan was put on moderation. So it is a false statement to say that "this is patently unclear". I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Paul J. Weiss
I for one very much appreciate that the moderators put Dan on moderation. I support sanctions for insulting and rude behavior. Peter--if you are looking for exact, quantitative criteria, you aren't going to get it. This is about impact of communication on the receiver, not specific words used by

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
{{trigger warning : French joke included}} Dear Pete, let me explain why this is problematic. First I am sorry to say there is no hidden agenda or awful witchery plot to uncover including WMF influence. I have myself severely criticised the WMF in the course of the branding process (and was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
There was no clear statement of "this is the problematic text and this is why it is considered unacceptable", which is a thing that I consider a reasonable expectation, as it is possible to learn from it, understand it, pass constructive criticism or agreement, and use as it a precedent for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
I would call this fair comment, and parallels can be drawn between how the UCoC may be used and the current discussion. Without clear statement on why a decision is made it cannot be properly understood, accepted or improved, and we end up in the usual spiral of speculation, accusation and bad

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
In that case, can we please have an explanation of exactly how the relevant text was found to be inappropriate, as this is patently unclear, and apparently the reason for all this debate. I have my own speculation, but as it is speculation, it would be inappropriate to publicise unless there is no

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Benjamin Ikuta
Thanks for the reply. I took a look at it and found it terribly vague. Depending on subjective interpretation, I can imagine it being used to justify whatever judgement is to be made. I am no more enlightened. > On Sep 11, 2020, at 4:05 AM, Alphos OGame wrote: > > Hello everyone, >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Alphos OGame
Hello everyone, What I want to read : comments on the UCoC. What I don't want to read : a barrage of *insert adjective, whether laudative or criticizing* reply after reply after reply after reply on the comments of one or more of the subscribers of this list. I understand the initial comments

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Quim Gil
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 9:31 AM Benjamin Ikuta wrote: > > > Please, enlighten me. > Here is an alternative suggestion. Check the UCoC draft and see whether you see room for improvement or disagree with anything specific in it. This is a productive way to compare your personal understanding of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Adam Wight
Is there somewhere we can refer to the list of offensive and unacceptable expressions, and how they are determined? There were been several explanations already.  It's possible to use mild words in a cruel way, for example a father telling their child "You've always had beans for brains." 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Asaf Bartov
No, it is not "forbidden words" that are the problem, and we have no intention of maintaining a list. We expect list subscribers to maintain civil discourse, which does include avoiding vulgarity, and expressing oneself with respect to both one's interlocutors (or addressees of criticism) and the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
Is there somewhere we can refer to the list of offensive and unacceptable expressions, and how they are determined? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anders Wennersten Sent: 11 September 2020 10:33 To:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
It is not yet clear that the use of the words "fart" or "flatulence" are the actual issue. Context matters, but we do not know the full context yet, as the reasons have not been explained, leaving us with little option but to speculate. We are experiencing a failure of communication as much, or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Anders Wennersten
There are many of us on this list who have given the feedback we find that expression offensive and unacceptable. Do not forget the readers of this list comes from may different cultures and if you and the people close to you find it "acceptable" it is not a valid judgment for all, and why do

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Benjamin Ikuta
Please, enlighten me. On Sep 10, 2020, at 11:39 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > Am Fr., 11. Sept. 2020 um 08:07 Uhr schrieb Benjamin Ikuta > : >> >> Is there some context that makes this much worse than it seems, or do I have >> a deeply flawed understanding of civility? > > Well, are you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Todd Allen
Except, apparently, if someone says "fart". For godsakes, that's about the mildest of language you could ask for. I could use far stronger about this whole farce. If the "UCoC" means that people can't say "fart" because someone might get their feewings hurted, then I've very well been right to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Yaroslav Blanter
Hi Natacha, I am not opposed to UCoC but I am afraid you have unrealistic expectations. We do have serious behavioral problems in the big communities. One of them, for example, is that the general tone of discussions is very aggressive and prevents some categories of users, for example, women,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Am Fr., 11. Sept. 2020 um 08:07 Uhr schrieb Benjamin Ikuta : > > Is there some context that makes this much worse than it seems, or do I have > a deeply flawed understanding of civility? Well, are you open to consider the possibility that the latter might theoretically be the case, at least

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-11 Thread Benjamin Ikuta
Am I reading this correctly? You were moderated for calling the UCoC flatulence? Is there some context that makes this much worse than it seems, or do I have a deeply flawed understanding of civility? On Sep 9, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Dan Szymborski wrote: > That's OK. I have much bigger

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Asaf Bartov
Mr. Szymborski, I understand you have very little faith in the Wikimedia Foundation, and are upset about some past decisions and statements it has made. As I already wrote above, you are welcome to express that criticism so long as you manage to remain civil, which includes avoiding vulgarity.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Dan Szymborski
Sure, WMF running roughshod over the community is something that doesn't happen. I must be imagining the events that led to the community open letter on renaming, which featured nearly a thousand individual endorsers and 72 community affiliates.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Dan Szymborski
I'm not "confused" at all. Nor do I have any willingness to be "educated" by you. I reject your argument and I will reiterate that nothing I said would be in violation of any UCoC in existence. This kind of condescending talking-down-to is far more insulting than anything I said. Perhaps you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Dan Szymborski
I strongly disagree. There's no "reasonable person" standard in which anything I said would be found offensive. I'm frequently sought out by professors as a *mentor* for journalism students and we talk about issues such as this. I'm no shock jock. If anything, this spell highlights one of the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
For a UVoC to be helpful, it would have to be sufficiently clear about what is unacceptable, and why it is unacceptable, and would itself have to be sufficiently clear and acceptable to be seen as fair by the communities who would be bound by it. This is not easy to do, and the talk page

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Anders, I think you are referring to jargon. I agree that it should be avoided in the interests of clarity and ease of reliable translation. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anders Wennersten Sent: 10

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Anders Wennersten
I want to echo Jackies two mail The community for svwp is not so big and complicated issues on conduct are uncommon. But when they occur we often get caught in argument like " you who claim to decide over svwp CoC are just a small kabal of some 10-120 admins, you are unrepresentative and the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Jackie
Dan, I am so glad you have given us a real-world example as to how a Universal Code of Conduct would be super helpful. It would provide you with a clear understanding of how your comments impacted others. It wasn't just your use of the word "flatulence" (which, funny enough, I had to reference

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Joseph Seddon
Wikipedia has been a third tier social media platform since its inception. Luckily we are better known for being an encyclopedia. On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:31 AM Dan Szymborski wrote: > I am absolutely flabbergasted that a generic reference of an organization > to flatulence, something we see

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Peter Southwood
Are those things not already covered by the terms of use? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Amir Sarabadani Sent: 10 September 2020 13:22 To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Amir Sarabadani
I just want to say while I agree IMO there's a growing disconnect in some parts of WMF with the communities but it's not happening here. In fact it's also the other way around. Some people in communities and some communities in general have been growing too disconnected from the framework they are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Asaf Bartov
As you can see, Dan, your choice of imagery, appreciated and encouraged in less buttoned-up journalism, is offensive to some subscribers here. Your strong criticism of the Foundation, on the other hand, is perfectly acceptable. As a professional wordsmith, I am confident you can continue to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Dan Szymborski
I am absolutely flabbergasted that a generic reference of an organization to flatulence, something we see in rated-G television isn't considered "collegial" enough yet the actions that the WMF has taken over the last 18 months, many of which were pushed by people on this list *are* considered

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-10 Thread Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l
Hello, A code of conduct id something many of us have asked the WMF to write for many years. We are asking the WMF to take an active part in stopping abusive behaviors in our community. On fr wiki, many admins say they are tired of conflicts and that they did not enroll to deal with them. A

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-09 Thread Gnangarra
Yair I was in the room in 2017 when the first community consultation on the strategy program took place. Affiliates were asked to send a person specifically for the strategy process, and WMF also invited some other community members. There was absolutely no coercion, or control over what topics

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-09 Thread Yair Rand
The UCoC is obviously a WMF-driven project. It was announced in June 2019 by a member of the WMF Trust and Safety team, was added to the strategy process by the group of WMF appointees (or sometimes WMF appointee-appointees) who made up the working group, had pseudo-consultations about it started

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-09 Thread Dan Szymborski
That's OK. I have much bigger platforms. My apologies for the ultra-offensive reference to...flatulence. Best, Dan On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 4:03 PM Jackie wrote: > Hi Dan, > > I hear that you are upset by the suggestion and likely implementation of a > Universal Code of Conduct. I also hear

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-09 Thread Jackie
Hi Dan, I hear that you are upset by the suggestion and likely implementation of a Universal Code of Conduct. I also hear that you feel like this is a WMF-driven project. I cannot change your opinion about the UCoC, but I can say your feelings about this being a WMF-driven project are untrue. It

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-09 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, I do not like the text. You first state a problem that the policy is to address. By flipping the order it becomes instantly more positive. The objective is to instill the notion what normal behaviour is and that sadly we have to insist on normal behaviour. Thanks, GerardM On Mon, 7

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-09 Thread Samuel Klein
Dear anonymus, The problem starts when the administrators who are called to > perform those rules are the harrashers themselves and don' t get punished. > A code of conduct should preempt this. > For example [users who can] fly under the rader and be likeable. [users who] run the annual

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής
Some thoughts over the matter: Wikipedia has already rules about how the users should interact and the "penalties" that all users would endure equally if they wouldn 't apply to them. If you are a volunteer/user the things are simple. You get blocked and that is that. Imagine being a newbie then

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Dan Szymborski
There was meant to be a " " there, but my phone rudely stripped it. If it does it again, I'll make up a rule and suspend it for a year. It's what the WMF would want, I'm sure. On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 3:45 PM Andy Mabbett wrote: > On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 20:06, Dan Szymborski wrote: > > > The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Samuel Klein
Thanks Patrick + all. It looks like most discussion is happening on Meta, which seems fitting. On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 4:18 PM Patrick Earley wrote: > Hello, everyone. > > We are excited to share a draft of the Universal Code of Conduct >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Gnangarra
UCoC is pointless if their systems of enforcement are themselves biased or weighted in any way to those who are known to the community. The large communities already have policies, the problem in those communities is the unwillingness and inability of the process to be enforced equally on those

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Andy Mabbett
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 20:06, Dan Szymborski wrote: > The only tiniest shred of direct accountability on the board, the community > board elections [...] They're not elections; we get to vote on nominations, the board decide whether to accept them. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Dan Szymborski
Yeah, we've seen from the branding fiasco just how much the imperial overlords deign to respect the opinions of the peasants. The only tiniest shred of direct accountability on the board, the community board elections, have been scuttled for Very Convenient Reasons. The model is terribly broken

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Isaac Olatunde
Hello Dan, You are allowed to offer an opinion but I Honestly think that's better and more useful on the Draft talk page. That being said, by "effective vote or representation in the proceedings", you probably expected a different model where different language Wikip(m)edia community would be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Dan Szymborski
I'm also perfectly free to express to the IRS that I'd really like to get a $10 million check from them at tax time. The ability to offer an opinion on proceedings with no effective vote or representation in the proceedings is about as good as a fart in the wind. I'd prefer the WMF keep its

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Isaac Olatunde
On the contrary, I do not think this is an imposition by the Board or WMF as we are allowed to comment on the draft, and suggest improvement. I have been following the process closely and I do not see anything that looks like an "imposition" The Universal Code of Conduct is not a substitute to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-08 Thread Dan Szymborski
As this is being explicitly imposed by the board from above without community approval, participating in any way is ethically unsound. Doubly so without a board election preceding this as the WMF has arbitrarily denied communities the right, as manifested in the election of the community seats, to

[Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code of Conduct draft for review

2020-09-07 Thread Patrick Earley
Hello, everyone. We are excited to share a draft of the Universal Code of Conduct , which the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees called for earlier this year