On Wed, 2018-08-08 at 15:36 +0100, Fæ wrote:
> So what?
Nah, rather https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism when someone
brings up en.wp stuff though the subject line says CoC?
andre
--
Andre Klapper | Bugwrangler / Developer Advocate
https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/
Of course. But then you also have to consider that certain decisions by
employees also can discourage people from constructive participation,
especially when they are not thinking that their voice is or will be
heard in any way.
@Brion: Wasn’t talking about any ‘abuse’. As far as I know (as
Yeah, even if it seems like volunteers are treated as second class
citizens, advocating mistreatment of staff too isn't going to resolve
anything. We should all just try to do our best, and all realise that
these are /peolpe/ we're dealing with. It's not always going to be
perfect, it's not
On 8 August 2018 at 19:54, Brion Vibber wrote:
> Oleg -- I interpret that suggestion as "employees of WMF and WMDE have to
> accept all ongoing abuse they are given without complaint"; that may not be
> what you intended but that's how I read it, and I'd like to unequivocally
> *reject that
> On Aug 8, 2018, at 1:43 PM, Saint Johann wrote:
>
> Code of conduct is important to be enforced, but, in my opinion, there should
> be a difference in how it’s enforced. To volunteers that help the movement,
> there should be no unacceptable language, as it is a way (and a purpose of
>
Oleg -- I interpret that suggestion as "employees of WMF and WMDE have to
accept all ongoing abuse they are given without complaint"; that may not be
what you intended but that's how I read it, and I'd like to unequivocally
*reject that notion*.
WMF and WMDE employees are people performing a job,
Sure.
Wikimedia Foundation employees inherently have more privilege and weight
in MediaWiki developer community than the volunteers do, especially less
participating ones. Power dynamics of the discussion between a volunteer
and an employee (and, sometimes even more generally on Phabricator)
> On Aug 8, 2018, at 9:42 AM, Saint Johann wrote:
>
> especially when said to Wikimedia employees as opposed to volunteers.)
Can you elaborate on that?
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
I’m sorry, but no, even the evidence that Jimmy Wales is a worst human
being on the entire planet Earth wouldn’t make some kinds of language
(like the one you are quoting from) acceptable in a collaborative
environment. Of course, he should apologise, but CoCC doesn’t have any
authority about
So what? This is Wikimedia Board Members that are setting a precedent
for acceptable language on our projects. Jimmy Wales himself gets
lauded with virtual high fives for telling a fellow board member they
are talking "fucking bullshit", and Jimmy Wales remains the only
memorable press/public face
On Wed, 2018-08-08 at 15:22 +0100, Fæ wrote:
> Wales has never retracted nor apologised for writing on the English
> Wikipedia that a statement by Heilman was "utter fucking bullshit".
English Wikipedia is not a venue covered by the CoC for Wikimedia
technical spaces. See
Saying "WTF" is by default acceptable for all projects unless the WMF
board agrees a resolution and enforces it on its own board members, as
well as volunteers and WMF employees. If anyone is blocked or banned
under the Technical CoC for using similar language which has been
published by WMF board
On Wed, 2018-08-08 at 09:16 -0400, kevin zhang wrote:
> So let me just clarify, so despite a few weeks ago the decision was
> effectively "we highly encourage but won't require", now it's if you
> do not include the coc then we will ban you from phabricator?
You need to quote whatever specific
No, this was for saying "WTF".
On 8 August 2018 at 15:16, kevin zhang wrote:
> So let me just clarify, so despite a few weeks ago the decision was
> effectively "we highly encourage but won't require", now it's if you do not
> include the coc then we will ban you from phabricator?
>
> Just want
That was about the other thing, putting Code of Conduct file into every
MediaWiki extension. Wikimedia Phabricator is by design a MediaWiki
development space, so it’s under code of conduct by all definitions.
(Although I must comment that banning a person for a ‘WTF’ type of
comment is really
So let me just clarify, so despite a few weeks ago the decision was
effectively "we highly encourage but won't require", now it's if you do not
include the coc then we will ban you from phabricator?
Just want to make sure I understand the current stance...
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 8:01 AM wrote:
>
16 matches
Mail list logo
