on 1/30/07 12:18 PM, Andrew Gray at shimgray(a)gmail.com wrote:
The (conceptual) reasoning for a civility rule
translates to:
"This is a collaborative project. Civility is needed in order to work
collaboratively with others. Not being civil rules out effective
collaboration; ruling out effective collaboration means you're not
working for the good of the project"
Basically, if someone doesn't play nice, they're not helping the
project - indeed, there's a good chance they're harming it, as a
combative and offensive attitude drives off contributors faster than
anything. And if they're not helping the project, well, please tell
them to bugger off. (in as many words...)
WP and its various interaction pages is my first exposure to this type of
dialogue between and among persons. The whole of my past experience has
been, in person, face-to-face communication.
Yes, it¹s all about context. I can see being in a meeting about a particular
issue, when two of the participants stray from the subject, and begin
hurling personal attacks at each other that has nothing to do with the
subject at hand. Their physical and verbal behavior is making it impossible
for anyone else to be heard, and is, in fact, very much getting in the way
of things. I can see turning to them and saying: ³If you¹re going to insist
on that bullshit take it outside; it has no place here.²
But, in the context of WP, how does this apply? How does what two people say
to each other on their personal Talk Pages disrupt the Project? For that
matter, in that two-way conversation, if it is one person flailing at the
other, can¹t that other person simply not respond? How does what one person
writes in this Mailing List disrupt the progress of an issue being
discussed? Simply ignore it or, as computer challenged as I am, even I
know where the DELETE button is :-).
The only reason words are ever banned is out of fear of the consequence of
their use.
Marc
--
The culture's gonna get us before the climate ever does.