Changes

→‎Support: Question for Joe Hazelton.
Line 166: Line 166:     
::While I'm not at this time going to remove the rant-like comments, I am ''prepared'' to remove them.  I think that the arrival of Joe, and Blissy, and Moulton, and indeed Jon and myself, is a point of concern and of opportunity.  I will not participate in this new project if it is just another Internet free-for-all.  However, I also want it to be a chance for anyone who has the capability to contribute '''within our designated format and our agreed-upon guidelines''', to do so.  Lord knows, if you cannot or choose not to write in a fluid, understandable, journalistic manner, there are about a million other fora where you can write in the manner that you wish.  We who will assemble in this new forum have both an entitlement and an obligation to maintain the joint the way we want it maintained.  I think the parameters should be set by a small team (3 or 5 persons who are willing and able to put in the effort), and then they enforce the standards of content quality, contributor behavior, and drama suppression.  If that means this cannot be an "open" forum, so be it.  If that means "by invitation only" is the way to go, so be it.  I'd prefer to try that it be as open as possible, but that may not be workable.  Right now, we're just talking about possibilities, so that's why I'm not removing comments.  Thanks for listening; I hope I've got it sort of "right" for a good portion of you. -- [[User:MyWikiBiz|MyWikiBiz]] 20:35, 10 October 2008 (PDT)
 
::While I'm not at this time going to remove the rant-like comments, I am ''prepared'' to remove them.  I think that the arrival of Joe, and Blissy, and Moulton, and indeed Jon and myself, is a point of concern and of opportunity.  I will not participate in this new project if it is just another Internet free-for-all.  However, I also want it to be a chance for anyone who has the capability to contribute '''within our designated format and our agreed-upon guidelines''', to do so.  Lord knows, if you cannot or choose not to write in a fluid, understandable, journalistic manner, there are about a million other fora where you can write in the manner that you wish.  We who will assemble in this new forum have both an entitlement and an obligation to maintain the joint the way we want it maintained.  I think the parameters should be set by a small team (3 or 5 persons who are willing and able to put in the effort), and then they enforce the standards of content quality, contributor behavior, and drama suppression.  If that means this cannot be an "open" forum, so be it.  If that means "by invitation only" is the way to go, so be it.  I'd prefer to try that it be as open as possible, but that may not be workable.  Right now, we're just talking about possibilities, so that's why I'm not removing comments.  Thanks for listening; I hope I've got it sort of "right" for a good portion of you. -- [[User:MyWikiBiz|MyWikiBiz]] 20:35, 10 October 2008 (PDT)
 +
 
:::Allowing people to contribute and get attached before banning them is a horrible idea. People don't get angry at publications to which they were never invited to contribute. It's unfair to someone to dangle before him the prospect of finally having a place where his voice can be heard, allow him to sink his time into it, and then stand in public judgment over him. So does Wikipedia creates its malcontents.[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 22:27, 10 October 2008 (PDT)
 
:::Allowing people to contribute and get attached before banning them is a horrible idea. People don't get angry at publications to which they were never invited to contribute. It's unfair to someone to dangle before him the prospect of finally having a place where his voice can be heard, allow him to sink his time into it, and then stand in public judgment over him. So does Wikipedia creates its malcontents.[[User:Proabivouac|Proabivouac]] 22:27, 10 October 2008 (PDT)
 +
 
::::Proabivouac, you're an arogant ass, who elected you to be a back seat wikipedidiot AssMin. If you don't like my screeds, then don't read them. [[User:Joehazelton|Joehazelton]] 23:18, 10 October 2008 (PDT)
 
::::Proabivouac, you're an arogant ass, who elected you to be a back seat wikipedidiot AssMin. If you don't like my screeds, then don't read them. [[User:Joehazelton|Joehazelton]] 23:18, 10 October 2008 (PDT)
 +
 +
:::::Joe, upthread you wrote:
 +
<BlockQuote><BlockQuote><BlockQuote><BlockQuote><BlockQuote><BlockQuote><BlockQuote><BlockQuote><BlockQuote><Font Color=maroon>
 +
AMEN... there needs to be a forum which the Concept of free speech, rule of law, and respect for the idea you fight bad speech with good speech and remove the idea of "GROUP THINK" and "THOUGHT CRIME" and "PC" A forum were ideas stand the test of augment with the ad humiumin non-sense of killing the messenger or the wikian idea of "SOCKPUPPET" is truly is offensive since you judge the idea and not the messenger. WikiRewiew has lost it's way and has dropped the ball in favor if APPESMENT OF THE POWER DRUNK WIKIPEDIDOT ADMIN. </Font>
 +
</BlockQuote></BlockQuote></BlockQuote></BlockQuote></BlockQuote></BlockQuote></BlockQuote></BlockQuote></BlockQuote>
 +
:::::Among those notions, Joe, one stands out for me:  '''Rule of Law'''.
 +
:::::Do you have faith in the Rule of Law?  If so, why?
 +
:::::[[User:Moulton|Moulton]] 15:09, 11 October 2008 (PDT)
    
==When can we start?==
 
==When can we start?==
67

edits