Summary style (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Response to Bryan Derken)

Thu Jun 10 20:57:01 UTC 2004

On 06/10/04 04:18, Geoff Burling wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>Abe Sokolov wrote:
>>>maveric149 at yahoo.com:

>>>"The ability to write good summaries is a rarer trait than the ability
>>>to write at length on a subject. Let those who can summarize help
>>>improve the article series by making it useful to people who don't
>>>want to read for an hour."

>>>Are you saying that I can't. FYI, I've written dozens of brief

>>I would prefer to take Mav's statement at the face value of a generality

> Treating the topic as a personal afront appears to be 172's strategy in
> every interaction. One is left with one of two reactions: bewildered shock
> that one has inadvertently caused offense, or suspicion that 172 is
> acting in bad faith. I have offered evidence in my previous email why I
> embrace the latter interpretation, but here's one more example:
> 172 complains that he doesn't have the time to make certain changes in the
> article under discussion, & that the article isn't important enough for him
> to make them. Mav offers to do the work, & 172's response is to find offense.

I don't think it's bad faith at all. Although the effects are often 
indistinguishable, the motivation is important.

User:172 is annoying and arbitrary. But I'm sure Abe Solokov is in fact a fine 
fellow. There's something about the Internet hothouse social environment that 
sets some people off.

Abe: when people make personal attacks on 172, you really do have to imitate a 
duck's back and let it roll off.

172 just doesn't seem to get the [[Cathedral and the Bazaar]].
One's edits, style and formatting have to be intuitively obviously a good idea 
to a random editor a year hence. Reverting in a territorial fashion because 
it's decided in one's own mind is an example of not being able to work with 
others.

(I am trying to go easier on [[Linux]] when the [[GNU]] partisans - who I in 
fact agree with on the [[GNU/Linux naming controversy]] - change the whole 
article while introducing grammatical errors into *every sentence edited*.)

I present to you an essay: "What Makes A Fuckhead?" by David Kendrick.
(Warning: contains salty language.)

     http://thingy.apana.org.au/~fun/fuckhead.html

It works better if you think of it as an adjective not a noun, e.g. "Am I 
having an attack of fuckhead today?" I catch myself a lot.

The primary Internet social skill is to (0) accept that "My God! It's full of 
idiots!" and (1) be able to cope with the fact. "Staying cool when the editing 
gets hot."

(This is a very rough draft of a prospective pompous essay on the subject. 
Acerbic editorial demolition welcomed.)

- d.

ps: trolls are NO trouble compared to the people described above. Trolls 
sometimes rest.