David Gerard wrote:
On 11 August 2015 at 00:10, MZMcBride
<z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:
I'm curious which comparable organizations
you're referring to.
Pretty much any open source project with an organisation. You've
already been referred to e.g. the Geek Feminism wiki on this point, so
if you haven't read up there already then it comes across as
sealioning to ask yet another person the same question.
I didn't ask yet another person, I asked the person who shouted that
everyone else has already inexpensively solved this issue. Is there a
similarly derogatory phrase that I can use for you to describe your
behavior of pointing to an entire wiki as an "answer" to a question?
it's been pointed out by multiple people in this
thread already that
we're after a change in behaviour rather than more text, so you
bringing this up again this late comes across as "I didn't hear that".
I've been mostly keeping up with the talk page discussion on
mediawiki.org. I think this quote nicely sums up my feelings: "My
experience with mw and wikimedia development as a whole has been such that
these areas have overall come across as far more civil than most 'content'
projects I've interacted with, and yet the latter tended to have policies
out the wazoo." Our actual experience, hard-earned over time, makes it
pretty clear that having a lot of policies doesn't address behavioral
issues (and I think you and I agree on that).
Regarding "this late," this thread is less than a week old, so I honestly
have no idea what the hell you're talking about there. Is it really too
late to suggest that one of the _dozens_ of similar pages that we already
have might fill the same niche as this proposed code of conduct?
MZMcBride