imported>Anonymous~metawiki |
|
| (25 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | # We are one Wikipedia. |
| | # Our goal is to build a complete, free encyclopedia. |
| | # We have infinite resources and plenty of time. |
| | # If we don't help each other, we will fail. |
| | |
| | |
| Good idea: test the PHP script | | Good idea: test the PHP script |
|
| |
|
| Line 5: |
Line 11: |
| One hopes enlightenment will come before total darkness falls. | | One hopes enlightenment will come before total darkness falls. |
|
| |
|
| Good idea: Have policy pages as part of [http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Militia Wikipedia]. | | 12 November: too bad. I would have very much liked to build the entry on the plane crash. Oh well. |
| | |
| | 29 November: Good idea: Have policy pages as part of [http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Militia Wikipedia]. |
|
| |
|
| Bad idea: Fear-based, military-analogy policies: "it's possible that the average newbie in this generation of contributors would be of the way-too-clueless variety, and that a significant minority would be downright malicious..." "It could be a major disaster." Save the fear-mongering for the federal government with respect to acts of terrorism, not a openly editable website. We don't need the Wikipedia equivalent of the [http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act USA PATRIOT Act]. LMS needs to stop watching so much CNN. (Seriously, though, if you're in charge of a collaborative, volunteer project, and you start getting a bunker mentality, a red flag should be going up.) | | Bad idea: Military-analogy policies. |
|
| |
|
| 12 November: too bad. I would have very much liked to build the entry on the plane crash. Oh well.
| | 17 December: Good idea: be relativist about religion |
| | |
| | Bad idea: In fit of political correctness, change all instances of "X mythology" to "stories of X religion". |
| | |
| | 10 January: Good idea: Only permanently and irrevocably delete pages that have no historical use or future use. |
|
| |
|
| ----
| | Bad idea: Delete a list of such entries which someone else put on meta-wikipedia. |
| :Well build it! You know you're the best we have at that sort of stuff. I don't know why you are having so much trouble coping with the thought that there is a place for the encyclopedia, and a separate place for discussions "about" the encyclopedia, and anything else you want to talk about. I view it more as an exercise in neatness and tidiness, rather than an attempt to inhibit discussion. After all, when you buy Britannica, you don't get all the inter-office memos that obviously went into its creation. In my own view *everything* that is not an encyclopedia article would *not* be in the 'pedia, including all the talk entries. However this is not about restrictions, this is about distinguishing the "encyclopedia" from the "discussion about the encyclopedia". | |
|
| |
|
| :Anyway, I'm really saddened to see you taking it this way. As someone who has also dealt with the "should I stay or should I go" issue, I do hope you reconsider, because regardless of your disputes with Larry, everyone (including LMS) sees you as a vital and passionate contributor to the project. - [[MMGB]] | | 17 January: Good idea: let people discuss merits of Wikipedia policy using the Wiki collaborative process. |
|
| |
|
| :I agree 100% with the above. - [[Seb]] | | Bad idea: Force attribution of authorship to every paragraph. |
| ----
| |
| Oh, I haven't stopped contributing simply because of the "meta" move, even though I basically disagree with all of your arguments; note the use of "when you buy Britannica"--Wikipedia had been built on the exact opposite philosophy of a purchasable, fixed object. Framing what LMS has done to me as "disputes with Larry" is rather misleading, as he is in the paid employ of the project and self-appointed "dictator-for-life" and I'm just someone who decided to volunteer some time and effort. He can make sweeping decisions about the Wikipedia project and censor and punish dissent; I can't. LMS has told me that he doesn't consider me a vital and passionate contributor to the project, but a troll whose input on Wikipedia policy is not welcome.
| |
| ----
| |
| :Well, many people here do consider you a vital and passionate contributor to the project. -AxelBoldt
| |
| ----
| |
| I genuinely and deeply appreciate your support, but unless substantive changes are made, I will no longer contribute to the project in any significant way. You really should start using the past tense.
| |
|
| |
|
| I'll continue to point out bugs in the PHP Script, because I respect Magnus's effort, as a contributory way of saying that blindly embracing it is foolhardy. But its nature only reflects the overall nature of Wikipedia; I can't blame the Script for that.
| | 11 October: Good idea: [[Thoughts on Wikipedia interlanguage priorities|harmonize interlanguage efforts]]. |
|
| |
|
| By the way, is anyone storing tarballs?
| | Bad idea: make stabs at political correctness without a clear understanding of the consequences. |
| ----
| |
| :I have said many times and in many ways that you've done excellent work for us. I dare not say more. I don't want to get into another exchange of characterizations. --[[user:Larry_Sanger|Larry_Sanger]] | |
| ----
| |
| Thank you. I do wish you had stuck to that. I assume you just believe that I somehow transformed from someone doing excellent work to someone doing horrible, destructive things, which would mean I must be insane, retarded, delusional, or malicious. I'm simply arguing that I'm not, and that maybe the work that you have found to be destructive would have been as beneficial to Wikipedia as my work on, e.g. 9/11. Oh well.
| |
| ----
| |
| * M*****s "I'm not a drop-out - maybe a kick-out ;-P" For the record, M*****s doesn't want to be listed on this [[Wikipedia drop-outs]] page.
| |
|
| |
|
| I'm still active on wikipedia, allthough not as blatantly as in the beginning (I would be trolled by LMS); I just do what I like, within the reality as it is censored by LMS
| | 3 July: Bad idea: amateurish pastel boxes on homepage. |
|
| |
|
| So, I'm NOT a drop-out! I might have been one, perhaps I should have been one, but I'm not. Got it? -- Mathijs
| | [[User:The Cunctator/Poetry|/Poetry]] |
| ----
| |
| [[Quotations on the openness of society]] | |
|
| |
|
| | [[User:The Cunctator/Talk|/Talk]] |
- We are one Wikipedia.
- Our goal is to build a complete, free encyclopedia.
- We have infinite resources and plenty of time.
- If we don't help each other, we will fail.
Good idea: test the PHP script
Bad idea: balkanize discussion.
One hopes enlightenment will come before total darkness falls.
12 November: too bad. I would have very much liked to build the entry on the plane crash. Oh well.
29 November: Good idea: Have policy pages as part of Wikipedia.
Bad idea: Military-analogy policies.
17 December: Good idea: be relativist about religion
Bad idea: In fit of political correctness, change all instances of "X mythology" to "stories of X religion".
10 January: Good idea: Only permanently and irrevocably delete pages that have no historical use or future use.
Bad idea: Delete a list of such entries which someone else put on meta-wikipedia.
17 January: Good idea: let people discuss merits of Wikipedia policy using the Wiki collaborative process.
Bad idea: Force attribution of authorship to every paragraph.
11 October: Good idea: harmonize interlanguage efforts.
Bad idea: make stabs at political correctness without a clear understanding of the consequences.
3 July: Bad idea: amateurish pastel boxes on homepage.
/Poetry
/Talk
