The 15 limit is busted regularly by normal active posters. I disagree with that one.
George William Herbert Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 22, 2017, at 9:03 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi list members, > > The list admins (hereafter 'we', being Austin, Asaf, Shani and I, your > humble narrator) regularly receive complaints about the frequent > posters on this list, as well as about the unpleasant atmosphere some > posters (some of them frequent) create. > > It is natural that frequent posters will say specific things that more > frequently annoy other list members, but often the complaints are due > to the volume of messages rather than the content of the messages. > > We are floating some suggestions aimed specifically at reducing the > volume, hopefully motivating frequent posters to self-moderate more, > but these proposed limits are actually intending to increasing the > quality of the discourse without heavy subjective moderation. > > The first proposal impacts all posters to this list, and the last > three proposals are aimed at providing a more clear framework within > which criticism and whistle-blowing are permitted, but that critics > are prevented from drowning out other discussions. The bandwidth that > will be given to critics should be established in advance, reducing > need to use subjective moderation of the content when a limit to the > volume will often achieve the same result. > -- > > Proposal #1: Monthly 'soft quota' reduced from 30 to 15 > > The existing soft quota of 30 posts per person has practically never > been exceeded in the past year, and yet many list subscribers still > clearly feel that a few individuals overwhelm the list. This suggests > the current quota is too high. > > A review of the stats at > https://stats.wikimedia.org/mail-lists/wikimedia-l.html show very few > people go over 15 in a month, and quite often the reason for people > exceeding 15 per month is because they are replying to other list > members who have already exceeded 15 per month, and sometimes they are > repeatedly directly or indirectly asking the person to stop repeating > themselves to allow some space for other list members also have their > opinion heard. > -- > > Proposal #2: Posts by globally banned people not permitted > > As WMF-banned people are already banned from mailing lists, this > proposal is to apply the same ‘global’ approach to any people who have > been globally banned by the community according to the > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans policy. > > This proposal does not prevent proxying, or canvassing, or “meat > puppetry” as defined by English Wikipedia policy. The list admins > would prefer that globally banned people communicate their grievances > via established members of our community who can guide them, rather > than the list admins initially guiding these globally banned people on > how to revise their posts so they are suitable for this audience, and > then required to block them when they do not follow advice. The role > of list moderators is clearer and simpler if we are only patrolling > the boundaries and not repeatedly personally engaged with helping > globally banned users. > -- > > Proposal #3: Identity of an account locked / blocked / banned by two > Wikimedia communities limited to five (5) posts per month > > This proposal is intended to strike a balance between openness and > quality of discourse. > > Banned people occasionally use the wikimedia-l mailing list as a > substitute of the meta Request for comment system, and banned people > also occasionally provide constructive criticisms and thought > provoking views. This proposal hopes to allow that to continue. > > However people who have been banned on a few projects also use this > list as their “last stand”, having already exhausted the community > patience on the wikis. Sometimes the last stand is brief, but > occasionally a banned person is able to maintain sufficient decorum > that they are not moderated or banned from the list, and mailing list > readers need to suffer month after month of the banned person > dominating the mailing lists with time that they would previously have > spent editing on the wikis. > -- > > Proposal #4: Undisclosed alternative identities limited to five (5) > posts per month > > Posting using fake identities allows people to shield their real life > *and* their Wikimedia editing 'account' from the repercussions of > their actions. This provision to allow fake identities on wikimedia-l > is necessary for whistle-blowing, and this mailing list has been used > for that purpose at important junctures in the history of the > Wikimedia movement. > > However it is more frequently abused, especially by some ‘critics’ who > have used incessant hyperbole and snark and baiting to generally cause > stress to many readers. Sometimes this is also accompanied with many > list posts on various unrelated threads as the ‘critic’ believes their > criticism is so important that all other discussions about Wikimedia > should be diverted until their problem has been resolved to their > satisfaction, which is unlikely anyway. > > Note this explicitly does not include anyone posting using their real > world identity, whether or not they have a Wikimedia account. > > Where a poster does not clearly link to either Wikimedia account, or > does not appear to be using a real identity, and only after it is > exceeding the five post limit, the list admins will privately ask the > poster to either verify their identity or stop posting until the end > of the month. Very frequently a whistle-blower is able and even > prefers to be documenting the problem on meta, but needs the high > profile of this list to spark the discussion and draw attention to > their meta page. > > > --- > > The five post allowance for proposals 3 and 4 are to ensure that > anyone who has not been globally banned can post criticisms without > repercussions, which is vital for whistleblowing and transparency > generally, but they need to use their five posts per month wisely. > Once they have used their five posts, community members can reply with > less concern about being drawn into a direct argument with the poster. > It aims to force the poster to listen to others in the community once > their limit of five posts has been reached. > > If there is support for these proposals, the list admins would not > immediately add moderation or bans, but would implement them as > needed, when we notice someone has exceeded one of these limits, and > we would make a note on a meta page where the community can review > these actions without allowing moderation meta-discussion to dominate > the discourse on the mailing list. Refinements to the list moderation > limits can then occur organically as we see how these rules plays out > in practise. > > > The RFC is at > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/wikimedia-l-post-limits > > However please also feel welcome to reply on-list if you wish to > express explicit support or opposition to any of the four proposals > above (please identify them by number, to ease counting). We will > count votes (here and on the meta RFC) after two weeks, and post a > more refined final version back to this mailing list. > > The list administrators will default to *enacting* all four proposals, > but will refrain from enacting any proposal receiving more opposition > than support. > > -- > John Vandenberg > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
