Mailing List Archive

David Gerard wrote:

>Dear smart people,
>
>Please look over
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:David_Gerard/Process_essay and hack
>it to bits.
>
>
Interesting. One point that could perhaps be made: Process works best
when it protects the rights of minorities.

It's always good to remind those who work metaphorically to thwart the
"conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids," that
they are not Stanford Prison Guards.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On 14/09/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge@telus.net> wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:

> >Please look over
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:David_Gerard/Process_essay and hack
> >it to bits.

> Interesting. One point that could perhaps be made: Process works best
> when it protects the rights of minorities.


What are some examples on Wikipedia?


> It's always good to remind those who work metaphorically to thwart the
> "conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids," that
> they are not Stanford Prison Guards.


Phrasing it that way is unlikely to get through to anyone behaving
that way - they are of as good faith and dedication to the project as
you or I, even if they're obviously complete idiots.

But then, they think we're complete idiots. Call this the Assumption
of Symmetrical Stupidity. (I'll see if [[:en:WP:AGF]] would benefit
from a refactor, and put that in there if it would.)


- d.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

+++ David Gerard [14/09/06 20:31 +0100]:
>On 14/09/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge@telus.net> wrote:
>> David Gerard wrote:
>
>> >Please look over
>> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:David_Gerard/Process_essay and hack
>> >it to bits.

Not bad. link to it from m:instruction_creep?
It should go into wp space or onto meta at some point.

>But then, they think we're complete idiots. Call this the Assumption
>of Symmetrical Stupidity. (I'll see if [[:en:WP:AGF]] would benefit
>from a refactor, and put that in there if it would.)

Perhaps there's a relativist law that any pair of people are of
necessity symmetrically stupid. that would explain a lot of
stalemates.

SJ
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

SJ Klein wrote:

>+++ David Gerard [14/09/06 20:31 +0100]:
>
>
>>But then, they think we're complete idiots. Call this the Assumption
>>of Symmetrical Stupidity. (I'll see if [[:en:WP:AGF]] would benefit
>>
>>
>>from a refactor, and put that in there if it would.)
>
>Perhaps there's a relativist law that any pair of people are of
>necessity symmetrically stupid. that would explain a lot of
>stalemates.
>
This suggests that long lasting marriages have have accomodated the
symetrical stupidity of stale mates.

Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l