Incivility is difficult to deal with. One of the reasons is because there is a school of thought that a certain level of frankness and brusqueness is necessary in a place like Wikipedia. The trouble with that is that people draw the line in different places, partly due to cultural differences, partly due to personal levels of what they will accept.
Some people also treat this as a matter of principle, rather than as one of being nice. The way I would describe it (though you really need to find an exponent of this view to describe it properly, as I don't support this view myself) is that it is more honest to say what you really think in simple language, than to dissemble and use careful and diplomatic language to essentially say the same thing. I favour the latter approach until a certain tipping point is reached, and will then be more frank myself. I can see the point people are making when they say that being more forthright earlier on and consistently on a matter of principle is better, but the end result tends to be the same. Hurt feelings all round for those who don't get that viewpoint, and those who have a tendency towards the more brusque approach sometimes (not always) being baited by those who like winding people up. The other effect, most damagingly of all, is that the 'community' (which is a localised, nebulous entity that is in flux at the best of times and varies depending on location and timing) ends up polarised over the issue. So you get periodic flare-ups, exacerbated by the nature of online communications (the lack of body language to and verbal tone) and the lack of empathy for others that some who are drawn to Wikipedia exhibit. Carcharoth On 4/16/13, Kathleen McCook <[email protected]> wrote: > Right--and this would make all the difference. I am teaching a college > class for which an optional assignment is to learn to edit in Wikipedia. > Most of the students have had good experiences. Only a few have felt > "incivility consciously as a tactic. " We discuss this in class and a few > snide/bullying editors do great damage. There just isn't any reason for it. > Good people will not tolerate bullying. It's no rite of passage that people > must undergo. > > > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Charles Matthews < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> On 15 April 2013 18:39, Nathan <[email protected]> wrote: >> > "You're an idiot, and you're damaging the project. It's not about >> > copyright, or understanding it. What I'll do is to keep swearing at >> > you, and I'll be uploading tons of files onto en.WP, not Commons. That >> > will just disadvantage other users, and will cause Commons admins more >> > work eventually in having to go through the process of transferring >> > them to Commons. I will refuse to categorise. And I will encourage all >> > other editors to do the same. Continue your personal vendetta against >> > me—fine. Again, you and your thug friends on Commons are idiots and >> > deserve no respect. Tony (talk) 15:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)" >> > >> > That's the comment Charles refers to. Oops! I can see why some >> > frustration on Tony1's part is legit; a Commons admin deleted the >> > image illustrating the Signpost article on the attempt by the DCRI to >> > have a French Wikipedia article deleted, and then failed to explain it >> > in a way that would make sense to a non-expert. You won't see me argue >> > against accusations that Commons is dysfunctional, but the response is >> > clearly way out of proportion. >> > >> > But the point that I made, and that probably hundreds of people have >> > made before me, is that there isn't much we can do without altering >> > the fundamental architecture of the community. >> >> Actually, that is defeatist talk, and we can. >> >> It is completely clear that some editors use incivility consciously as >> a tactic. (The cited conversation is a smoking gun, if one were >> needed.) Such people should be sanctioned. Many more people have a >> temper (come to think of it, just about everyone does), and the point >> needs to be made that sanctioning those who use incivility >> systematically and disruptively does not mean sanctioning everyone on >> the planet. >> >> Then perhaps we could deal more rationally with the issue that >> discussions on enWP are often conducted in the wrong "register". >> >> Charles >> >> _______________________________________________ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
