May I respectfully ask why Rogol is not on moderation already?

Regards,

Isaac.

On Aug 24, 2017 5:31 AM, "Craig Franklin" <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> wrote:

> Joining the pile-on here.  The focus on nitpicking semantics rather than
> substantive issues, passive-aggressive grandstanding ("May I suggest that
> you withdraw your original posting"), and the threat to tattletale on
> someone to their boss for expressing a perfectly reasonable perspective are
> exactly the sort of toxic conduct that is outside of the community's
> expectations and outside of what I believe the community wants to see on
> this list.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
> On 24 August 2017 at 12:05, Robert Fernandez <wikigamal...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Agreed.  This sort of thinly veiled threat towards someone, whether the
> > Foundation is their employer or not, should be grounds for moderation or
> > banning.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjes...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey Rogol:
> > >
> > > "Alternatively,
> > > perhaps you would prefer me to ask your line manager whether this is
> the
> > > sort of behaviour that she expects you to exhibit in a public forum."
> > >
> > > This is the kind of "unconstructive" behavior the list is talking
> about.
> > I
> > > fail to see how threatening to tattle to someone's manager, because
> they
> > > disagreed with you about the wording of your posts in public, is either
> > > constructive or the "sort of behavior" one would "expect you to exhibit
> > in
> > > a public forum." But then again, I'd venture to guess you knew that
> > > already.
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > > Dan Rosenthal
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thoughtful, practical, good. Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > On Aug 22, 2017 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>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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>

Reply via email to