Op vrijdag 17 augustus 2012 schreef Ryan Lane (rlan...@gmail.com) het
volgende:
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
discouraging people from acting this way.
I've long advocated for
On 08/17/2012 07:05 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
I just don't happen to agree that such behavior (making a mess and
then simply walking away) is acceptable in this case.
I agree that if Daniel had simply walked away from the mess, it would be
right to call him out on it.
However, I didn't see any
On Aug 18, 2012, at 12:55 AM, Siebrand Mazeland (WMF) wrote:
Isn't the friendly space policy[1] something that can be applied here? If
that policy is slightly adapted so that online spaces are also covered, we
don't have to invent YACoC[2].
[1]
Brandon Harris wrote:
On Aug 16, 2012, at 7:18 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Ryan Lane wrote:
What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
phrase this.
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of
Tyler is right. So let's be positive and read that what's your plan as
a generic you, a question to the audience/community, and get the issue
fixed all together. I made my proposal/question/suggestion, it's the
best I can.
Alternatively, of course we could as well spend our energies in
On 17 August 2012 02:42, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote:
What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
phrase this.
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
think we should really put
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 07:05:24AM -0400, MZMcBride wrote:
the mess you made.
Right there, in that phrase, you have aggressively indicated the following:
a) That you believe someone fucked up;
b) That you think they're incompetent;
c) That you think they're being lazy about it
I
On 17 August 2012 14:22, Faidon Liambotis fai...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 07:05:24AM -0400, MZMcBride wrote:
the mess you made.
Right there, in that phrase, you have aggressively indicated the
following:
I didn't intend to indicate most of that, of course. That
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:05 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
that, I just don't happen to agree that such behavior (making a mess and
then simply walking away) is acceptable in this case.
- I already apologized for breaking links and yes, it was a mistake to
not just replace ALL
- I warned about broken links myself before, there is a trail for this on RT
All other opinions aside, this isn't good enough for a public list--RT
tickets aren't public. I don't even have an account there. Some public
posting (to the list, on a wiki somewhere) would be much better.
That
I think it's important to keep things in perspective, and not to overreact.
If you were treated this way consistently by someone, and the
community defended that person rather than calling them out on their
poor behavior, would you continue to volunteer? Do you expect staff to
continue working
Comments inline.
I think it's important to keep things in perspective, and not to
overreact.
If you were treated this way consistently by someone, and the community
defended that person rather than calling them out on their poor behavior,
would
you continue to volunteer? Do you expect
That said, I'm not overly irritated. There are a few links I need to
update, but that's doable. Thanks for handling this issue, and for being
responsive to the concerns raised.
While there's 475 links to wikitech-l archives on en wikipedia. That's
more than a few imo.
The real concern here is
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:07 AM, bawolff bawolff...@gmail.com wrote:
That said, I'm not overly irritated. There are a few links I need to
update, but that's doable. Thanks for handling this issue, and for being
responsive to the concerns raised.
While there's 475 links to wikitech-l archives on
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Adjust our procedures for thread deletion so that this situation
doesn't occur again.
2. Fix the links, if the effort level isn't insane.
I said this on IRC in some form, but I'll repeat it here on the
(hopefully
Hi all,
Roan, thanks for the even-handed treatment on this subject. More inline:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Roan Kattouw roan.katt...@gmail.com wrote:
Specifically, in the thread where Ryan called out MZ, the
question but what are you doing to fix this? was repeated in some
form or
I'm not complaining about being called out or even bashed for writing
overly hostile posts. I've done that a few times and I hate it when I
slip up and do it. If I get called out or bashed over that, I've
deserved it, and I'll take it. But what pisses me off is that it's
apparently impossible
«This is like the 27637862487 time that links have been broken due to
the exact same action.» I can bear hyperboles but this is a bit
excessive, and looks like just another attempt to make this flame
bigger: I hope the reality is closer to two or three times in the past
couple of years, and
Daniel Zahn wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 4:05 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
that, I just don't happen to agree that such behavior (making a mess and
then simply walking away) is acceptable in this case.
- I already apologized for breaking links and yes, it was a mistake to
not
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
«This is like the 27637862487 time that links have been broken due to the
exact same action.» I can bear hyperboles but this is a bit excessive, and
looks like just another attempt to make this flame bigger: I hope
Ryan Lane wrote:
What seems to have happened here, is that one action has broken many (all?)
links to Mailman archives. That, in my book, is a mess. The question was,
to that someone who made the mess, what his plan was to clean it up.
Again with the phrasing. Cut it out.
Sincerely, I'm
Ryan Lane wrote:
Can we make an acceptable behavior policy?
[...]
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
discouraging people from acting this way.
I've long advocated for adopting
Sincerely, I'm still a little unclear what phrasing you object to here. Just
to be perfectly clear, it's the use of the word mess, right? If so, I can
make note not to use that word going forward on this list.
It may be a regional thing, but where I'm from, when a lot of things get
broken,
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
discouraging people from acting this way.
I've long advocated for adopting toolserver-l's mailing list etiquette
guideline on all Wikimedia mailing
What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
phrase this.
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
discouraging people from
Ryan Lane wrote:
What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
phrase this.
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
think we should really put effort into coming up with some method of
On Aug 16, 2012, at 7:18 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Ryan Lane wrote:
What is your plan to clean up the mess you made?
I need to call you out on this MZ. This is an incredibly rude way to
phrase this.
I get that our community tends to accept this kind of behavior, but I
This is (hopefully) a community. When somebody fucks something up, they own
up to it and somebody fixes it (sometimes the person who did it fixes it,
sometimes somebody else). The proper way to phrase it would have been So
how can we go about fixing this?. By saying that you're not putting one
28 matches
Mail list logo
