Timestamps are CEST (UTC +2), NTP synchronized. Because that's the time zone I live in. :-)
People start showing up around 17:00 (15:00 UTC, the advertised time.), but actual lectures always start at around 17:30 (15:30 UTC). We reckon 30 minutes setup time, to make sure everyone is there and everything is working, etc.
- BEGIN LOGGING AT Sun Apr 27 16:51:46 2008
Apr 27 16:51:46 * Now talking on #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 16:51:48 * Notify: henna is online (FreeNode).
Apr 27 16:51:48 * Notify: gerardm is online (FreeNode).
Apr 27 16:51:50 quiet here
Apr 27 16:52:07 not a good sign , that
Apr 27 16:52:16 we can go around advertising again?
Apr 27 17:03:08 * Sardanaphalus (n=chatzill@96.96-84-212.ippool.ndo.com) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 17:03:18 hi!
Apr 27 17:03:24 I think Grey Knight vanished...
Apr 27 17:03:26 hi
Apr 27 17:03:32 are you on Skype?
Apr 27 17:03:38 nope, sorry
Apr 27 17:03:45 will that be a prob?
Apr 27 17:03:51 dunno
Apr 27 17:05:05 kim_ ^^
Apr 27 17:06:35 i'm guessing it probably will -- talking and typing at same time??
Apr 27 17:06:58 Heya!
Apr 27 17:07:05 We may need to do talk on irc
Apr 27 17:07:17 * You are now known as kim_bruning
Apr 27 17:07:23 * ChanServ gives voice to kim_bruning
Apr 27 17:07:35 you mean no skype?
Apr 27 17:11:19 * maximr|away (n=chatzill@unaffiliated/maximr2) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 17:12:04 well, if there's lots of people not=on-skype
Apr 27 17:12:07 we'll do it on irc
Apr 27 17:12:15 which I'm totally ok with
Apr 27 17:12:21 and also rather less nervous about actually :-)
Apr 27 17:13:26 okay, will standby
Apr 27 17:13:52 heh
Apr 27 17:16:31 * Thehelpfulone2 (n=Helper@unaffiliated/thehelpfulone) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 17:16:37 what's this channel about? :D
Apr 27 17:16:47 * SteveCrossin (n=stevenc2@unaffiliated/stevecrossin) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 17:16:56 today it's about how to make friends and influence wikis :-)
Apr 27 17:17:03 heh
Apr 27 17:17:11 i have 5 wikis ;)
Apr 27 17:17:18 going to be talking about consensus and how to use it to get your way with it
Apr 27 17:17:24 (to a fair extent anyway)
Apr 27 17:17:29 btw
Apr 27 17:17:31 http://travelguidewiki.scribblewiki.com/Template:ScribbleWiki:_Travel_Guide_Wiki:Requests_for_adminship/Cro0016
Apr 27 17:17:35 Wikipedia:Lectures
Apr 27 17:17:40 >90mins
Apr 27 17:17:41 * microchip08 (n=Microchi@) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 17:17:48 o_O
Apr 27 17:17:54 * #wikipedia-en-lectures :You need to be a channel operator to do that
Apr 27 17:17:54 travelguidewiki?
Apr 27 17:17:54 O_o
Apr 27 17:17:57 yer
Apr 27 17:18:00 * #wikipedia-en-lectures :You need to be a channel operator to do that
Apr 27 17:18:00 No topic. How dare he?
Apr 27 17:18:04 oops
Apr 27 17:18:11 spam alert?
Apr 27 17:18:13 >chanserv< op #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 17:18:14 * ChanServ gives channel operator status to kim_bruning
Apr 27 17:18:18 gah'
Apr 27 17:18:20 * kim_bruning has changed the topic to: How to make friends and influence wikis. Wikipedia:Lectures
Apr 27 17:18:29 not spam
Apr 27 17:18:32 * kim_bruning gives voice to kim_bruning
Apr 27 17:18:35 * kim_bruning removes channel operator status from kim_bruning
Apr 27 17:18:40 okay
Apr 27 17:18:54 "How to make wikis and influence friends"
Apr 27 17:18:55 * SteveCrossin wishes it would auto-sysop him after the rfa closes
Apr 27 17:19:14 RPTF:
Apr 27 17:19:30 "How to make fiends and inflame wikis"?
Apr 27 17:19:37 * microchip08 just blocked a load of people on the test wiki... :-)
Apr 27 17:19:37 lol
Apr 27 17:19:53 TGW has a troll at the moment
Apr 27 17:19:55 Sardanphalus: want me to discuss that too?
Apr 27 17:20:02 Oh I could sit upstairs!
Apr 27 17:20:02 all pages are full protected
Apr 27 17:20:02 "How to inference friends and mock wikis"
Apr 27 17:20:07 well, I'll stick around here
Apr 27 17:20:09 add vandalism
Apr 27 17:20:12 to the topic
Apr 27 17:20:13 Sardanaphalus, all that, and more!
Apr 27 17:20:16 :)
Apr 27 17:20:17 wow
Apr 27 17:20:20 we're starting in 10 minutes :-)
Apr 27 17:20:24 as in anti-vandalism
Apr 27 17:20:29 not pro vandalism
Apr 27 17:20:30 :P
Apr 27 17:20:46 okay, i'll pay more attention then, getting a drink right now
Apr 27 17:20:57 please kim
Apr 27 17:21:11 its the only real thing i have a good knowledge on
Apr 27 17:21:13 ohhhh
Apr 27 17:21:14 also
Apr 27 17:21:27 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor_review/Steve_Crossin
Apr 27 17:21:30 :)
Apr 27 17:21:41 but yea Kim
Apr 27 17:21:44 dont wait for me, "i'll be barck"
Apr 27 17:21:46 can wetalk about it
Apr 27 17:21:56 Can anyone edit User talk:DGG ?
Apr 27 17:22:18 yes
Apr 27 17:25:16 spammed
Apr 27 17:25:42 kim plz
Apr 27 17:25:45 :-)
Apr 27 17:26:44 tnks?
Apr 27 17:26:46 wtf?
Apr 27 17:26:52 sup?
Apr 27 17:27:18 Okay
Apr 27 17:27:25 this looks to be everyone joining today
Apr 27 17:27:35 no rly, its something i know about
Apr 27 17:27:38 the rest
Apr 27 17:27:44 im crap on :~(
Apr 27 17:28:12 what was it that you're really good at?
Apr 27 17:28:21 barck
Apr 27 17:28:22 * kim_bruning scrolls back
Apr 27 17:28:25 bark!
Apr 27 17:28:42 so, is it skype or irc or both somehow?
Apr 27 17:28:58 * AaronSchulz (n=chatzill@wikipedia/VoiceOfAll) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 17:29:01 * microchip08 thinks a "The lecture starts in less than 10 minutes" would be a good addition to the /topic
Apr 27 17:29:32 .
Apr 27 17:29:38 In 30 seconds...
Apr 27 17:29:38 "The lecture starts in 30 seconds"
Apr 27 17:29:43 lol
Apr 27 17:29:46 .
Apr 27 17:29:48 Kim: yes or no?
Apr 27 17:29:49 :)
Apr 27 17:29:53 1
Apr 27 17:29:57 10
Apr 27 17:30:04 START!
Apr 27 17:30:07 :-)
Apr 27 17:30:08 BANG
Apr 27 17:30:15 * microchip08 turns room moderation on
Apr 27 17:30:19 "The lecture ended abruptly"
Apr 27 17:30:38 * microchip08 awaits for the overdue lecture
Apr 27 17:30:48 * microchip08 sighs
Apr 27 17:30:58 patience? :-p
Apr 27 17:31:04 it's okay, i still got some other windows open here
Apr 27 17:31:10 No. kim_bruning MUST be on time!
Apr 27 17:31:55 * microchip08 starts pacing
Apr 27 17:32:11 I'm here
Apr 27 17:32:11 :-)
Apr 27 17:32:15 It's not overdue
Apr 27 17:32:18 AaronSchulz is VoiceOfAll? :O :)
Apr 27 17:32:19 We have 30 minute setup
Apr 27 17:32:24 and that's done now
Apr 27 17:32:26 Everyone ready?
Apr 27 17:32:29 microchip's fan broke down, he/she's overheating
Apr 27 17:32:39 ...
Apr 27 17:32:42 * microchip08 fizzles
Apr 27 17:32:51 time for microchip09
Apr 27 17:33:01 Okay
Apr 27 17:33:01 * microchip08 is now known as green_budgie
Apr 27 17:33:08 any more spares, john?
Apr 27 17:33:12 I tried to get until1==2 in here too
Apr 27 17:33:13 oh well
Apr 27 17:33:14 okay
Apr 27 17:33:22 * green_budgie is now known as Microchip08
Apr 27 17:33:46 someone tap Fill on the shoulder too
Apr 27 17:33:47 * SteveCrossin ignored
Apr 27 17:33:48 Ok...
Apr 27 17:33:54 * kim_bruning huggles SteveCrossin
Apr 27 17:33:55 *was
Apr 27 17:33:57 and let's start ...
Apr 27 17:33:59 =======
Apr 27 17:34:06 Room mod on?
Apr 27 17:34:12 Off
Apr 27 17:34:16 you get to talk
Apr 27 17:34:21 but be nice :-)
Apr 27 17:34:24 else I just might :-P
Apr 27 17:34:25 * Microchip08 shuts up
Apr 27 17:34:27 roger
Apr 27 17:34:28
Apr 27 17:34:33 roger roger!
Apr 27 17:34:46 Alright , when the noise is down to a dull roar :-)
Apr 27 17:34:52 lol
Apr 27 17:34:57 So welcome to this 4th lecture in the lectures series
Apr 27 17:35:00 * SteveCrossin roars dully
Apr 27 17:35:06 Yay!
Apr 27 17:35:13 so in last lectures we've been finding our footing
Apr 27 17:35:18 and discussing consensus
Apr 27 17:35:23 and the dispute resolution system
Apr 27 17:35:27 and laying some ground work
Apr 27 17:35:46 Today we'll be embracing and extending that model
Apr 27 17:35:58 anything else?
Apr 27 17:36:03 and we might also look at some extinguishing
Apr 27 17:36:10 SteveCrossin: that's not enough? ;-)
Apr 27 17:36:16 nope
Apr 27 17:36:20 LOL
Apr 27 17:36:21 * Microchip08 tells SteveCrossin to shuddup
Apr 27 17:36:23 okay, i missed the dispute intro but will try keeping up
Apr 27 17:36:39 * SteveCrossin shuts up
Apr 27 17:36:48 Ok, we'll also do something even more interesting for SteveCrossing, he gets to make the call after 45 minutes :-)
Apr 27 17:36:57 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Consensus_new_and_old.svg
Apr 27 17:37:08 So here's the basic consensus model for folks who missed last lectures
Apr 27 17:37:15 there's also translations into other languages now
Apr 27 17:37:30 so is everyone familiar with that? Else I'll do a lightning recap
Apr 27 17:37:47 * Microchip08 understands
Apr 27 17:37:52 dont worry bout me
Apr 27 17:37:54 eeyup
Apr 27 17:38:35 Right, just for me to catch my footing then :-)
Apr 27 17:38:50 there's 2 loops. Short one was fast (wiki wiki in hawaiian ;-) ) editing
Apr 27 17:39:01 long one was slow (lohi lohi in hawaiian ;-) ) editing
Apr 27 17:39:06 also the long one is trouble
Apr 27 17:39:11 Today... we're gonna make trouble ;-)
Apr 27 17:39:24 And then get back out of it :)
Apr 27 17:39:53 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BRD
Apr 27 17:40:04 So here's the second most misunderstood page on wikipedia ;-)
Apr 27 17:40:15 (the most misunderstood is probably WP:POINT :-P )
Apr 27 17:40:25 Take a look at the chart.
Apr 27 17:40:26 HEH
Apr 27 17:40:28 i like the BRD idea
Apr 27 17:40:35 look familiar?
Apr 27 17:40:41 kim_bruning you any good with svg?
Apr 27 17:40:56 White: not as good as I'd like to be
Apr 27 17:41:01 drawing charts is tricky :-)
Apr 27 17:41:08 I use inkscape
Apr 27 17:41:11 alright
Apr 27 17:41:12 all I need is the addition of transparancy
Apr 27 17:41:23 must be some decent freeware flowchart programs out there
Apr 27 17:41:32 I just use inkscape ;-)
Apr 27 17:41:37 though, yes there are
Apr 27 17:41:42 but svg is easy to translate
Apr 27 17:41:56 anyway, so carrying on...
Apr 27 17:42:00 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:8_-_AmStar_7.JPG
Apr 27 17:42:05 see the ribbon there
Apr 27 17:42:12 that svg should not have white bg
Apr 27 17:42:24 same goes for http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Cyanocitta-cristata-004.jpg one
Apr 27 17:42:25 White_Cat: Dude, we are not discussing your images today
Apr 27 17:42:29 its strangely invisible
Apr 27 17:42:41 oh class was in session?
Apr 27 17:42:47 White_Cat, yes
Apr 27 17:42:48 -_-'
Apr 27 17:42:55 Nice kitty :-)
Apr 27 17:42:56 * White_Cat wears a dunce hat and sits in the corner
Apr 27 17:43:02 okay, it's BRD
Apr 27 17:43:08 Right
Apr 27 17:43:40 So here's the situation
Apr 27 17:43:49 you're going to do something that could potentially be controversial
Apr 27 17:44:05 and you don't know who you need to talk to to get it to work
Apr 27 17:44:10 you could go on the talk page and ask
Apr 27 17:44:18 but there's a bunch of busybodies always on the talk page you see
Apr 27 17:44:29 and they might just keep you busy all week
Apr 27 17:44:43 and it won't tell you anything about people with WP:OWNership issues
Apr 27 17:44:57 or people who desperately need to keep particular content in or out
Apr 27 17:44:59 or whatever
Apr 27 17:45:05 reminds me of the "Don't stuff beans up your nose" page I saw sometime
Apr 27 17:45:09
Apr 27 17:45:20 cept now we're gonna find people with beans in their noses...
Apr 27 17:45:22 or some such ;-)
Apr 27 17:45:34 so we can abuse the normal consensus process to actually find people :-)
Apr 27 17:45:40 for some value of abuse
Apr 27 17:45:49 basically, you make a major change to the page ...
Apr 27 17:45:50 "in a manner of speaking"
Apr 27 17:45:56 and then sit and wait :-)
Apr 27 17:46:08 this is , technically ... trolling
Apr 27 17:46:14 ;-)
Apr 27 17:46:19 disagree!!
Apr 27 17:46:23 but go on
Apr 27 17:46:24 works for me!
Apr 27 17:46:25
Apr 27 17:46:35 well, you're casting out a net to see what you will catch
Apr 27 17:46:58 more like, casting net and hoping noone awkward notices
Apr 27 17:47:06 So what if nobody actually jumps? Heh, lucky you, I guess your change just got consensus
Apr 27 17:47:13 Nah, we want to catch the awkward folks
Apr 27 17:47:15 something like that
Apr 27 17:47:17 the nice folks will just talk ;-)
Apr 27 17:47:22 okay
Apr 27 17:47:23 we need the awkward ones
Apr 27 17:47:38 so next thing you know, someone awkward comes along and reverts you.
Apr 27 17:47:44 Now the rules say they need to talk with you. :-)
Apr 27 17:48:11 so now you've got one pissed off awkward person on the talk page demanding to know why the flying **** you **** his ****ing page ;-)
Apr 27 17:48:19 (or her)
Apr 27 17:48:26 Bingo! :-)
Apr 27 17:48:29 chuckle
Apr 27 17:48:47 and if they're not, you can always go to their talk page and ask why they reverted
Apr 27 17:48:57 once again, due to wiki-etiquette, they're compelled to answer
Apr 27 17:49:03 actually i think i've larned not to say that
Apr 27 17:49:08 *learned
Apr 27 17:49:19 so now you've got the exact person you had ulcers about all week
Apr 27 17:49:24 and you're talking with them FIRST
Apr 27 17:49:27 which is a good thing
Apr 27 17:49:35 since it can only get easier after this
Apr 27 17:49:44 ?
Apr 27 17:50:14 well, the objective here is to find out what "awkward people" are watching the page and will make your life hell if you try to edit it :-)
Apr 27 17:50:37 so now we got one awkward person, compelled to talk with you on the page.
Apr 27 17:50:39 QED :-)
Apr 27 17:50:45 * Microchip08 is confused
Apr 27 17:50:48 where's the compulsion??
Apr 27 17:50:56 What if they don't want to talk?
Apr 27 17:51:11 they're compelled for two reasons
Apr 27 17:51:26 first of all, they're potentially pissed off... which will make then tend to want to talk
Apr 27 17:51:48 Of course, now you need to deal with an angry person... but that's mediation... which vassyana will explain more about next week :-)
Apr 27 17:52:11 secondly, wiki-etiquette says they need to talk
Apr 27 17:52:13 okay
Apr 27 17:52:29 finally, you have the advantage in a revert war, they hit the 3rr barrier first.
Apr 27 17:52:49 zomg what about its spirit?
Apr 27 17:52:57 okay ultimately they need to (try to ) oimmunicate with someone eventually otherwise it's the ban wagon
Apr 27 17:53:01 xavexgoem: I told you today we'd talk about being naughty ;-)
Apr 27 17:53:10 that's why I said zomg :-p
Apr 27 17:53:24 not approve, i also saw a 1RR page somewhere
Apr 27 17:53:28 the spirit of 3RR is actually to force people to talk rather than revert
Apr 27 17:53:39 so actually we're totally on the spirit here
Apr 27 17:53:41 persuade people
Apr 27 17:53:44 oh
Apr 27 17:53:46 we want to get people to talk too
Apr 27 17:53:50 * xavexgoem goes to meet with white cat
Apr 27 17:53:57 xavexgoem, how come?
Apr 27 17:54:06 prompt people, at most prod people
Apr 27 17:54:07 no reason
Apr 27 17:54:23 Sardanaphalus, yes. But at first, you need to get them in a position where you can persuade people
Apr 27 17:54:37 so the 3rr approach is generally not so very good, that's the extreme :-)
Apr 27 17:54:45 ya, so no good if they feel "forced"
Apr 27 17:54:47 try to use WP:HEC instead. (which is like 1RR)
Apr 27 17:54:49 okay
Apr 27 17:54:52 * Microchip08 points everyone to Wikipedia:Lectures/4/Summary
Apr 27 17:54:52 Indeed...
Apr 27 17:54:59 erm
Apr 27 17:55:05 unrelated question
Apr 27 17:55:10 WP:CLUE
Apr 27 17:55:13 redirects to
Apr 27 17:55:15 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CLUE#Wikipedia_is_not_a_democracy
Apr 27 17:55:19 LOL
Apr 27 17:55:21 yes?
Apr 27 17:55:23 i dont get it
Apr 27 17:55:36 it's not a democracy, but that doesnt mean it's the Third Reich
Apr 27 17:55:50 it's not a democracy because it's a "consensusocracy"
Apr 27 17:55:53 we're more advanced ;-)
Apr 27 17:56:00 oh right
Apr 27 17:56:00 !
Apr 27 17:56:02 we hope?
Apr 27 17:56:03 but you gotta learn the ropes a bit more :-)
Apr 27 17:56:08 okay
Apr 27 17:56:09 xavexgoem, we hope :-)
Apr 27 17:56:18 btw WP:HEC looks intriguing
Apr 27 17:56:23 "Your comments show you have the [[WP:CLUE|clue to successful block (or not) vandals. "
Apr 27 17:56:24 new for me
Apr 27 17:56:29 thats why i wasnt sure
Apr 27 17:56:32 in my ER
Apr 27 17:56:37 Interesting :-)
Apr 27 17:56:39 ER?
Apr 27 17:56:45 editor review
Apr 27 17:56:46 right, so we covered BRD first...
Apr 27 17:56:51 okay
Apr 27 17:56:53 thanks
Apr 27 17:56:59 that's the trickiest one :-)
Apr 27 17:57:16 i vote for BRDocracy
Apr 27 17:57:17 and we'll probably come back and look at that particular hat trick some more over time
Apr 27 17:57:30 and vassyana might also mention it
Apr 27 17:57:47 it's an example of how to use consensus for the side effects, not for the main effect
Apr 27 17:57:55 so it's kinda spectacular, kinda fun, and kinda naughty
Apr 27 17:58:04 hmm
Apr 27 17:58:08 spanky spanky
Apr 27 17:58:08 and try to avoid using it on purpose too often. :-)
Apr 27 17:58:28 you can sometimes end up doing BRD by accident if you be bold normally , and get reverted
Apr 27 17:58:29 :-)
Apr 27 17:58:49 or you can decide to do brd to mediate, or to force changes past someone who is stonewalling or fillibustering
Apr 27 17:58:54 Alright
Apr 27 17:58:59 next topic is WP:SILENCE
Apr 27 17:59:03 GRR
Apr 27 17:59:08 Stonewalling
Apr 27 17:59:10 which is a very key part of the consensus process
Apr 27 17:59:37 sounds like it's something my omission
Apr 27 17:59:41 *by omission
Apr 27 17:59:58 we actually have a separate page all for the little line between "make an edit" and "was the page edited further?"
Apr 27 18:00:01 :-)
Apr 27 18:00:23 umm explain bit more please
Apr 27 18:00:34 Right :-)
Apr 27 18:00:46 so basically
Apr 27 18:00:51 you are humming along on a page
Apr 27 18:00:56 make a bunch of edits
Apr 27 18:01:06 and at the end of the day, you're done, wipe your hands, and go home...
Apr 27 18:01:16 and all hell breaks lose
Apr 27 18:01:19 or... turn off your computer, or close the browser, or what have you ;-)
Apr 27 18:01:19 loose
Apr 27 18:01:21 GRIN
Apr 27 18:01:30 well.. if all hell breaks loose, welcome to BRD ;-)
Apr 27 18:01:40 Silence is the other side of the coin
Apr 27 18:01:47 if all hell *doesn't* break loose
Apr 27 18:01:53 well... possibly your change has consensus
Apr 27 18:01:54 well, that's okay then
Apr 27 18:01:58 yes
Apr 27 18:02:01 and if the next day all hell doesn't break loose either
Apr 27 18:02:07 maybe some more
Apr 27 18:02:11 well, until someone who doesn't like it notices
Apr 27 18:02:12 and day after that...
Apr 27 18:02:15 exactly
Apr 27 18:02:19 and then all hell breaks loose ;-)
Apr 27 18:02:31 but by then it's off your watchlist
Apr 27 18:02:32 but you can't live in fear of all hell every day :)
Apr 27 18:02:45 * Microchip08 is confused again
Apr 27 18:02:56 and maybe it'll stay that way forever
Apr 27 18:02:56 the payoff's coming micro
Apr 27 18:03:19 so what we *assume* is that ... until that day... that particular version of the page you made?
Apr 27 18:03:25 That particular version has consensus.
Apr 27 18:03:31 sure
Apr 27 18:03:49 and that's basically the relationship between silence and consensus
Apr 27 18:03:50 there needs to be a page about it??
Apr 27 18:03:54 oh okay
Apr 27 18:03:58 hello
Apr 27 18:04:10 i wonder how people don't get that
Apr 27 18:04:11 you can never be sure about support, but you can sure as heck be positive about opposition ;-)
Apr 27 18:04:12 You make an edit... you wait... if it isn't reverted, it has consensus; if it reverted, you talk with the revertee and then what?
Apr 27 18:04:13 oh i hate that
Apr 27 18:04:25 if i can talk
Apr 27 18:04:29 oh wait
Apr 27 18:04:38 Microchip08 told me to shut up
Apr 27 18:04:53 * Microchip08 did
Apr 27 18:04:56 xavexgoem, you reach a compromise, put the compromise up ... and then either that stays, or someone else comes and reverts... wash rinse repeat until people stop reverting and doing lohi-editing, and get back to wiki-editing ;-)
Apr 27 18:05:06 fine i wont talk :'(
Apr 27 18:05:13 maybe "There's no such thing as consensus, just discussions yet to be had"
Apr 27 18:05:17 okay... there's a bunch of cool things implied by silence
Apr 27 18:05:29 steve:you can talk, what's your question?
Apr 27 18:05:37 we'll go into silence in more detail in a sec
Apr 27 18:05:44 well, the case im mediating (deadlocked)
Apr 27 18:05:48 one editor
Apr 27 18:05:49 am amazed there's more to it
Apr 27 18:05:53 and then we'll do steve's mystery request
Apr 27 18:06:01 when they had strong opposition to suggestions
Apr 27 18:06:08 they'd state them
Apr 27 18:06:20 right?
Apr 27 18:06:28 but when there are discussions about things to resolve it
Apr 27 18:06:33 they just ignore
Apr 27 18:06:39 WP:SILENCE?
Apr 27 18:06:40 right. That can happen
Apr 27 18:06:58 I notice that too. I never know what happens after that.
Apr 27 18:07:08 possibly that's wp:silence too... but also possibly a somewhat dysfunctional communications strategy on their part
Apr 27 18:07:14 if they don't at least talk, time to go up the command chain
Apr 27 18:07:19 that is something that mediators need to be able to deal with.
Apr 27 18:07:24 err not this one]
Apr 27 18:07:35 Sard: no!
Apr 27 18:07:41 i.e. wikiquette alert, mediatation
Apr 27 18:07:41 sorry, go on.
Apr 27 18:07:43 no?
Apr 27 18:07:45 this one needs a completely new resolution
Apr 27 18:07:47 okay
Apr 27 18:07:55 oh, THAT chain. Not the worse chain.
Apr 27 18:08:00 Sardanaphalus, this is when there is already mediation. Xavex and Steve are mediators :-)
Apr 27 18:08:09 oops
Apr 27 18:08:11 okay
Apr 27 18:08:11 yea :)
Apr 27 18:08:17 roll out the arbitation thing
Apr 27 18:08:21 arbitration
Apr 27 18:08:24 grr!
Apr 27 18:08:26 arbcom is complaining ;-)
Apr 27 18:08:26 binding mediation
Apr 27 18:08:27 hiss!
Apr 27 18:08:34 it is?
Apr 27 18:08:37 yeah :-P
Apr 27 18:08:42 just seemed the heavy artillery to me
Apr 27 18:08:43 we'll have to think of something else :-)
Apr 27 18:08:55 arbcom is very heavy artillery, and they hate being overused :-)
Apr 27 18:09:05 see this kim
Apr 27 18:09:07 Microchip08, you have questions?
Apr 27 18:09:10 and everyone else
Apr 27 18:09:12 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Second_Intifada#Mediation-Deadlocked
Apr 27 18:09:16 kinda sucky
Apr 27 18:09:31 SteveCrossin, talk that through with vassayana in more detail eh?
Apr 27 18:09:42 er, ok..
Apr 27 18:09:48 okay, if wikiquette alert and incident noticeboard are pretty mild and arbitration council is heavy-duty, what's in between?
Apr 27 18:10:00 nothing
Apr 27 18:10:05 which is the issue
Apr 27 18:10:18 and its arbitration comittee ;)
Apr 27 18:10:23 ph yeah, sorry
Apr 27 18:10:26 Nishidani is very wrong, mediation can often be done discretely per e-mail . If they refuse that, they'll simply be left out of that loop :-)
Apr 27 18:10:33 is it the issue here, kim?
Apr 27 18:10:35 yer
Apr 27 18:10:39 partially
Apr 27 18:10:40 FT2 suggested it
Apr 27 18:10:44 people refusing to talk can be bad :-)
Apr 27 18:10:55 It's good to hear you're getting help from FT2 :-)
Apr 27 18:11:00 okay where were you heading kim?
Apr 27 18:11:04 yea hes a good guy
Apr 27 18:11:21 i set up a basic straw poll
Apr 27 18:11:31 okay, and see where that goes
Apr 27 18:11:33 Gah sorry... no ping.
Apr 27 18:11:35 all of them either accept/reject the proposal
Apr 27 18:11:35 so... any more questions?
Apr 27 18:11:39 * Microchip08 understands
Apr 27 18:11:44 if not....
Apr 27 18:11:50 Alright
Apr 27 18:11:51
Apr 27 18:11:54 hold on
Apr 27 18:12:00 Sardanaphalus, go on?
Apr 27 18:12:24 what's in between? I guess mediation is in between :-)
Apr 27 18:12:32 we just kind of jumped from the silence idea into areas like wikiquette, arbitration
Apr 27 18:12:39 was that the idea?
Apr 27 18:12:46 We paused for questions :-)
Apr 27 18:12:51 no kim
Apr 27 18:12:55 okay understood
Apr 27 18:13:00 its not
Apr 27 18:13:01 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lectures/4/Summary updated up till 5:04:52 - can someone continue it? Thanks
Apr 27 18:13:03 any more on silence?
Apr 27 18:13:08 yes there is
Apr 27 18:13:12 okay
Apr 27 18:13:20 SteveCrossin, ok, briefly explain, and then we'll get back to talking ...
Apr 27 18:13:22 kim_bruning: mediation isnt in between
Apr 27 18:13:33 unless im mistaken
Apr 27 18:13:34 SteveCrossin, it's in front? :-)
Apr 27 18:13:36 youre referring to
Apr 27 18:13:42 editors
Apr 27 18:13:43 wow microchip, that page was fast!!
Apr 27 18:13:45 not content
Apr 27 18:13:47 correct?
Apr 27 18:14:01 Sardanaphalus: Thanks
Apr 27 18:14:03 3O et al->mediation->heavy duty mediation->arbitration, no?
Apr 27 18:14:26 Oh, Microchip
Apr 27 18:14:34 when you edit per BRD, you do not go against consensus
Apr 27 18:14:38 you are trying to form consensus
Apr 27 18:14:54 xavexgoem, basically :-)
Apr 27 18:15:14 you're trying to test consensus
Apr 27 18:15:18 yes
Apr 27 18:15:27 and you are actually using the consensus process
Apr 27 18:15:29 * Elonka (n=elonka@24-217-123-9.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 18:15:34 and doing so step by step
Apr 27 18:15:36 Hello Elonka :-)
Apr 27 18:15:41 Ahoy. :)
Apr 27 18:15:46 hi!
Apr 27 18:15:59 Microchip08, has written a brief summary at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lectures/4/Summary
Apr 27 18:16:09 * Elonka sneaks in and takes a seat in the back of the classroom.
Apr 27 18:16:22 He has that being bold is going against consensus
Apr 27 18:16:28 on the creaky seat, i hear
Apr 27 18:16:29 though
Apr 27 18:16:36 I must have misexplained :-)
Apr 27 18:16:42 being bold is very much part of consensus
Apr 27 18:16:48 part of the process rather :-)
Apr 27 18:17:04 prob just a little mistake
Apr 27 18:17:04 right...
Apr 27 18:17:15 you still here, microchip?
Apr 27 18:17:21 Sardanaphalus, kinda essential though. You should never positively go against consensus :-)
Apr 27 18:17:26 yes
Apr 27 18:17:42 right so for the benefit of the student on the creeky chair
Apr 27 18:17:49 hmm shall i go try edit it now
Apr 27 18:17:57 okay i will during recap
Apr 27 18:17:58 go for it, this is a wiki ;-)
Apr 27 18:18:41 for the newcomer on the creeky chair, we just discussed WP:SILENCE as a specific part of the consensus graph
Apr 27 18:19:00 where you wait and wait, and assume you have consensus, until someone shows up and opposes your actions and all hell breaks loose ;-)
Apr 27 18:19:11 or maybe no-one ever will
Apr 27 18:19:20 both times, you just going to have to assume you have consensus
Apr 27 18:19:21 alright
Apr 27 18:19:30 so now there's several things that are implied by that.
Apr 27 18:19:43 this oppose-bias doesn't just occur on pages
Apr 27 18:19:51 everywhere oppose is more important than support ;-)
Apr 27 18:20:07 see RFA for example... are there more comments towards opposers, or towards supporters? :-)
Apr 27 18:20:29 okay i was just BOLD on that Summary page
Apr 27 18:20:32 has everyone seen a bunch of RFA's already and noticed how opposers tend to get comments, and supporters don'r? :-)
Apr 27 18:20:45 Sardanaphalus, now see if you get reverted , or if someone improves your edit further ;-)
Apr 27 18:20:53 hehe
Apr 27 18:21:00 Sardanaphalus, if no one does, you got consensus.... for now
Apr 27 18:21:08 yup
Apr 27 18:21:46 alright, so the way RFA works is a consequence of WP:SILENCE
Apr 27 18:21:59 you also see it a tad weaker at *FD (deletion pages)
Apr 27 18:22:23 originally deletion had a strong inclusionist bias... so you might have expected people to comment more on keep than on delete
Apr 27 18:22:41 nowadays the bias is shifting more towards deletion, so you can see people reply on the delete side
Apr 27 18:22:48 note that all these pages are not actually votes
Apr 27 18:22:57 i noticed the other day that the Categories page is for discussion
Apr 27 18:23:12 i mean, the CFD page
Apr 27 18:23:15 in a perfectly delineated situation, the system does approach a straight up-and-down vote
Apr 27 18:23:19 Sardanaphalus, indeed
Apr 27 18:23:31 that's probably a better name than for deletion
Apr 27 18:24:20 however, the situation needn't be perfectly delineated, and you may step around the normal procedure entirely, and just discuss and reach compromise on any RF* or *FD page
Apr 27 18:24:26 or even Xs for modification
Apr 27 18:24:38 just like you normally would. Though the closer will probably not love you ;-)
Apr 27 18:24:51 what you mean by "delineation" here?
Apr 27 18:24:53 unless you manage to reach a very clear consensus ...
Apr 27 18:25:11 well, if everyone either supports or opposes, and no compromise is possible ()
Apr 27 18:25:18 then it's a pretty white-line case
Apr 27 18:25:26 and you actually do have a straight up-and-down vote
Apr 27 18:25:48 The thing is, that the procedure is not actually officially a vote
Apr 27 18:26:01 and you don't have to treat it that way if you don't want to
Apr 27 18:26:04 meaning the last resort is the counting of votes, okay, i see
Apr 27 18:26:12 *nod*
Apr 27 18:26:31 make sense to others too?
Apr 27 18:27:10 yes (btw: ==re:irc== i will have to set it up when there isnt a deadline ~DGG)
Apr 27 18:27:32 the Democrats should choose their nominees by wiki
Apr 27 18:27:36 so now you understand when some crazy oldbie yells "80% is not consensus!!!!!11111oneoeeleven"
Apr 27 18:27:41 it really isn't
Apr 27 18:27:45 it's just the last resort :-)
Apr 27 18:27:57 LOL
Apr 27 18:28:00 it'd be more efficient
Apr 27 18:28:15 I totally tell people that the en.wikipedia consensus system is really cool for all kinds of reasons.
Apr 27 18:28:16 :-)
Apr 27 18:28:21 but that almost sounds like consensus = unanimous
Apr 27 18:28:35 which it isnt...?
Apr 27 18:28:45 Well, we have rough consensus... which means that if a small group holds out, and also refuses to concede , we can lock them out
Apr 27 18:28:46 :-)
Apr 27 18:28:56 well, not so smile there actually
Apr 27 18:28:58 Can you, err, expand into that?
Apr 27 18:29:01 that's actually kinda mean
Apr 27 18:29:10 that's basically what i'd say consensus is, but okay, less mean
Apr 27 18:29:11 alright
Apr 27 18:29:22 okay
Apr 27 18:29:31 Because say they ARE stonewalling; there is a silence insofar as talk page goes, but some guy keeps reverting back and forth (or he's obtuse on talk, or whatever)
Apr 27 18:29:35 basically if the large majority wants to do it one way
Apr 27 18:29:47 the holdout can try to convince them that their way is bette
Apr 27 18:29:50 better
Apr 27 18:29:58 but if they fail to convince, they should try to compromise
Apr 27 18:30:17 if they fail to compromise, they should concede and try to at least get some minor concessions for later
Apr 27 18:30:18 or come back another day (week, month, year)
Apr 27 18:30:36 Hehe, we'll get to that latter option in a minute Sardanaphalus ... that's an entire policy :-)
Apr 27 18:30:37 The important thing is that the holdout's opinions are listened to in a respectful manner...
Apr 27 18:30:46 right
Apr 27 18:31:01 The majority has the responsibility to listen respectfully, to weigh options, to consider compromises....
Apr 27 18:31:04 unless the holdout is utterly insane, raving, ranting, and/or refusing to cooperate in any way :-)
Apr 27 18:31:23 (the bar for insane is pretty low these days, methinks)
Apr 27 18:31:25 Elonka is very eloquent :-)
Apr 27 18:31:40 But after all that, if the consensus is still clear, the holdout can be ignored. And if they keep persisting in the face of consensus, like if they keep repeating the same argument over and over even after it's been considered, then that gets into the realm of disruption.
Apr 27 18:31:45 xavexgoem, it shouldn't be... else we could never have a remake of 12 angry men on-wiki
Apr 27 18:31:48 if the majority sees there's something in the holdout's POV, then a "Minority Report" should be in
Apr 27 18:31:59 Sardanaphalus, yup :-)
Apr 27 18:32:21 I've actually been writing this stuff up at the Working Group wiki. :)
Apr 27 18:32:24 Sardanaphalus, and that's even true at deletions or RFA's :-)
Apr 27 18:32:36 Elonka, I'm totally going to invite you to do some lectures too :-)
Apr 27 18:32:41 Eep!
Apr 27 18:32:44 * Elonka sits back down again.
Apr 27 18:32:46 Ok, I won't then :-)
Apr 27 18:32:59 I like your input. Please come sit in some more at least?
Apr 27 18:33:08 but if there doesn't seem to be anything other than being awkward, filibustering (sp?), etc, etc, then it gets no futher than the talk pages
Apr 27 18:33:10 Though I do have a cool new section of the New Admin School that I want to show you after class. :)
Apr 27 18:33:25 There's a new admin school?
Apr 27 18:33:27 wicked
Apr 27 18:33:31 they should all come here :-)
Apr 27 18:33:47 [new admin] school, new [admin school]?
Apr 27 18:33:55 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:New_admin_school
Apr 27 18:34:48 [new {admin ] school}
Apr 27 18:34:59 alright
Apr 27 18:35:09 so getting to my last story for today
Apr 27 18:35:25 there's another implication of WP:SILENCE that Sardanaphalus already guessed at.
Apr 27 18:35:30 i did?
Apr 27 18:35:33 Namely, that at any time, consensus can change
Apr 27 18:35:36 WP:CCC
Apr 27 18:35:39 oh okay
Apr 27 18:35:57 so if you ever disagree with anything
Apr 27 18:36:03 and you step up to the soapbox
Apr 27 18:36:22 no one can go "HALT! You're not allowed to change things anymore. Consensus is set in stone, frozen, and pickled"
Apr 27 18:36:33 absolutely, thank G
Apr 27 18:36:53 you can tell them to go do someting impossible involving their mother and some rather improbable gymnastics
Apr 27 18:36:59 (in the politest possible terms, of course)
Apr 27 18:37:10 pickled consensus... i like that image
Apr 27 18:37:37 and carry on and attempt to make the change you wanted
Apr 27 18:37:43 that's what it is on wikipedia -- not set or frozen, but definitely pickled
Apr 27 18:37:47 :P
Apr 27 18:37:50 * Notify: habj is online (FreeNode).
Apr 27 18:37:53 you may have to keep in mind that you're coming to the conversation rather late
Apr 27 18:38:02 true
Apr 27 18:38:22 and that others already have opinions
Apr 27 18:38:29 * habj (i=habj@wikipedia/habj) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 18:38:33 so you might automatically be in the position of the holdout , at first
Apr 27 18:38:45 and you'll have to start out convincing people
Apr 27 18:38:50 * kim_bruning waves to habj
Apr 27 18:38:51 but then i'd think that if the consensus has really stood the tests of time, someone has probably done one of those essay pages with a nutshell summary
Apr 27 18:39:01 hello habj!
Apr 27 18:39:05 Sardanaphalus, probably :-)
Apr 27 18:39:52 Of course, if you're in the position of the holdout, you first need to figure out who to talk to...
Apr 27 18:40:04 ... so guess what method you might consider using?
Apr 27 18:40:18 hehe BRD, i get it
Apr 27 18:40:28 so the circle is complete
Apr 27 18:40:36 and this lecture almost as well :-)
Apr 27 18:40:37 cue Lord of the Rings music
Apr 27 18:40:44
Apr 27 18:40:52 so one final note for today
Apr 27 18:40:56 okay
Apr 27 18:41:04 when you're playing with consensus, you have to keep one huge thing in mind
Apr 27 18:41:12 And that's that you need to assume good faith
Apr 27 18:41:21 and you need to give people confidence in their good faith in you
Apr 27 18:41:39 A consensus system will fail to operate without good faith.
Apr 27 18:41:54 ya
Apr 27 18:41:56 Typically, about 90% of the people you deal with are acting in good faith
Apr 27 18:42:06 but people assume bad faith rather more often
Apr 27 18:42:21 the human condition
Apr 27 18:42:27 and this means that you get problems with consensus more often than necessary
Apr 27 18:42:32 (is it? :-p)
Apr 27 18:43:00 (sure is, and if you don't agree with me... hehe)
Apr 27 18:43:32 (nah, but agree to disagree?)
Apr 27 18:43:46 Trust is essential to cooperation. More problems are caused by lack of trust than by misplaced trust
Apr 27 18:43:49 so trust first.
Apr 27 18:43:51 * Thehelpfulone2_ (n=Helper@unaffiliated/thehelpfulone) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 18:44:08 trust should be so much easier since it's all just data on screens
Apr 27 18:44:16 ((That's actually basic game theory , trust first is one of the most successful stratagems in iterated prisoners dilemma))
Apr 27 18:44:23 even if you're pretty sure someone is a slimy weasel
Apr 27 18:44:28 pretend they're nice anyway
Apr 27 18:44:40 9 times out of 10, if you're patient, they'll turn out to be nice in the end
Apr 27 18:44:44 nobody's a slimy weasel somewhere in their personality
Apr 27 18:44:55 if that makes sense
Apr 27 18:45:01 * habj is a slimy weasel sometimes
Apr 27 18:45:02 and if they don't. Heh, well, you come out smelling like roses, they come out banned
Apr 27 18:45:04 * Thehelpfulone2 has quit (Nick collision from services.)
Apr 27 18:45:06 And often people that you think are slimy weasels at the time, if you come back and read their messages a month later, you'll realize they weren't so bad. ;)
Apr 27 18:45:06 * Thehelpfulone2_ is now known as Thehelpfulone2
Apr 27 18:45:17 so AGF is totally a win-win proposition
Apr 27 18:45:24 also what Elonka said :-)
Apr 27 18:45:26 ultimately, yes
Apr 27 18:45:36 Assume good faith
Apr 27 18:46:53 so that basically concludes what I have to say about consensus. Remember that you're here to cooperate with people. And that's our highest law (in fact, higher than THE law... as the policy states at WP:IAR...
Apr 27 18:47:12 ... you can ignore rules, but do listen to the consensus of your peers)
Apr 27 18:47:33 ===== Questions ?
Apr 27 18:47:35 Rule 2: Ignore all rules except Rule 1.
Apr 27 18:47:45 oops
Apr 27 18:47:59 Rule 2: Ignore all rules except Rules 1 and 2.
Apr 27 18:48:14 you can even ignore those rules, if you like ;-)
Apr 27 18:48:26 where Rule 1 = AGF
Apr 27 18:48:28 alright, let's do questions, and then we go unmoderated...
Apr 27 18:48:35 maybe don't ignore rule 1 ;-)
Apr 27 18:48:48 SteveCrossin also might want me to do a mini-lecture for him ...
Apr 27 18:49:06 Elonka: I have a question for you too . Namely: what should we do next lectures on :-)
Apr 27 18:49:16 Well, I just heard about this today...
Apr 27 18:49:30 So I think it's really dependent on who the target audience is...
Apr 27 18:49:45 You have two audiences, as I see it. Those who show up real-time, and those who read the captures later...
Apr 27 18:49:52 Elonka, The target audience is whoever shows up. If you want to send folks here, they're the target audience, and we shall cater! :-)
Apr 27 18:49:53 Is there a "request" section on the page? I haven't read it all yet.
Apr 27 18:50:01 (how's that for an offer you can't refuse)
Apr 27 18:50:05 Elonka, Make one! :0
Apr 27 18:50:15 i thought there was one...?
Apr 27 18:50:17 Elonka, Make a request section, if you like, that's a good idea :-0
Apr 27 18:50:17 Of those who showed up today, what were you hoping to learn?
Apr 27 18:50:22 Sardanaphalus, Oh, okay :-)
Apr 27 18:50:30 I echo Elonka's question :-)
Apr 27 18:50:33 * kim_bruning listens
Apr 27 18:50:33 but i may be imagining it
Apr 27 18:50:52 i got this can of worms here but not sure if now's the time to open it
Apr 27 18:50:58 Kinda intuitive after a bit...
Apr 27 18:51:02 Sardanaphalus, Not Yet.
Apr 27 18:51:17 Sardanaphalus, show us the label on the can?
Apr 27 18:51:17 :-)
Apr 27 18:51:29 Elonka, you are cordially invited to Be BOLD :-)
Apr 27 18:51:43 If I'm understanding Sardanaphalus, he's hoping that this chat is sort of like a live Help Desk?
Apr 27 18:51:45 Elonka, on these pages, of all places! :-)
Apr 27 18:51:48 okay. But, just so you know, it's labeled "Difference between consensus in processes and consensus about facts"
Apr 27 18:52:01 I second Sard's can!
Apr 27 18:52:29 we're using consensus in processes so as not to confuse people
Apr 27 18:52:29 well, a help desk where you wonder up with nothing specific but know you're likely to get some useful help you didn't know you needed
Apr 27 18:52:36 the real thing is consensus about facts :-)
Apr 27 18:52:49 okay, well I'm NOT opening that can now
Apr 27 18:52:56 *wander
Apr 27 18:52:59 Wikipedia consensus was one of the hardest things for me to get my head around, as a new editor.
Apr 27 18:52:59 What if you're in a bitter dispute between reliable source 1 and reliable source 2?
Apr 27 18:53:11 arrg
Apr 27 18:53:15 * Elonka raises her hand. "Me! Me!"
Apr 27 18:53:21 i should've torn the label off
Apr 27 18:53:27 I used to think consensus for process was suboptimal. We were only using it so that stuff wouldn't b0rk encyclopedia-side if people dragged in voting on whether 1+1=3 ;-)
Apr 27 18:53:37 Elonka, go on?
Apr 27 18:53:54 Xavexgoem, if you two reliable sources that say completely different things...
Apr 27 18:53:57 Include 'em both.
Apr 27 18:54:00 (now I think consensus rocks everywhere, but maybe I just got used to it)
Apr 27 18:54:00 yes
Apr 27 18:54:14 Though WP:UNDUE also comes into play a bit...
Apr 27 18:54:37 What if one of the sources is only so reliable, but including it would be best for 10 people but 1 person disagrees "per WP:RS"
Apr 27 18:54:39 If there are 100 reliable sources, and 99 say "A" and 1 says "B", then you'd better be really sure that that "B" source is reliable, and not a typo.
Apr 27 18:54:45 sorry, tangent...
Apr 27 18:55:08 99 vs. 1 would probably relegate the one to a footnote
Apr 27 18:55:22 Or possibly not at all.
Apr 27 18:55:27 yup
Apr 27 18:55:37 I had a dispute with an editor over a "typoed" reliable source. The source was good, the sentence wasn't.
Apr 27 18:55:47 what if it's 99 smurfs vs 1 gargamel's cat on the color of gargamel's socks?
Apr 27 18:56:04 Erm?
Apr 27 18:56:08 anyway, i need a screen break and need to read transcript another time anyway
Apr 27 18:56:13 ah wait
Apr 27 18:56:17 the smurfs are less reliable
Apr 27 18:56:20 * Thehelpfulone2 is now known as THO2|Away
Apr 27 18:56:21 skip the example ;-)
Apr 27 18:56:22 oh lordy
Apr 27 18:56:44 nevermind. That's what happens on irc... you think you get a good idea
Apr 27 18:56:45 hit return
Apr 27 18:56:48 the scientist in me says: that's why we end up getting out there and testing things
Apr 27 18:56:51 and then wish you could revert yourself ;-)
Apr 27 18:57:00 Xavexgoem, can you expand upon your example?
Apr 27 18:57:04 Sardanaphalus, OMG, OR!
Apr 27 18:57:05 ;-)
Apr 27 18:57:08 * kim_bruning ducks
Apr 27 18:57:09 * SteveCrossin is now known as Jack_Bauer
Apr 27 18:57:26 hey, everything starts as OR :)
Apr 27 18:57:31 Amen
Apr 27 18:57:32 alright
Apr 27 18:57:42 looks like we're more in the end-of-lecture discussion phase now
Apr 27 18:57:45 50% of sources say "hostage"; 50% of sources say "captive". One guy wants hostage. The other wants captive. Synyonyms not allowed.
Apr 27 18:57:52 so let's make that official . Lecture over! ==================
Apr 27 18:57:52 thanks for prompting too many thoughts in my skull
Apr 27 18:57:55
Apr 27 18:58:08 Sardanaphalus, you're welcome. That's what we're here for ;-)
Apr 27 18:58:21 i need to send them to the back of it for a while now
Apr 27 18:58:30 Or maybe I just didn't argue well enough for synonyms. It seemed like they wouldn't have it.
Apr 27 18:58:44 so might have followup queries next time
Apr 27 18:58:59 bye!
Apr 27 18:59:17 * Seddon (n=chatzill@host81-157-83-161.range81-157.btcentralplus.com) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 18:59:19 bye Sard
Apr 27 18:59:22 Hi Seddon, just in time!
Apr 27 18:59:23 lol Seddon
Apr 27 18:59:28 youre late
Apr 27 18:59:33 's ok
Apr 27 18:59:34 * Sardanaphalus has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.81 [Firefox 2.0.0.14/2008040413]")
Apr 27 18:59:39 been spear chucking
Apr 27 18:59:44 orly
Apr 27 18:59:45 sounds like fun
Apr 27 18:59:46 :-)
Apr 27 19:00:04 btw
Apr 27 19:00:07 yep and ball throwing
Apr 27 19:00:11 i really am jack bauer
Apr 27 19:00:12 :P
Apr 27 19:00:13 Alright... also, we got habj in one of the back seats next to Elonka today :-)
Apr 27 19:00:16 and plate lobbing
Apr 27 19:00:24 habj is from svwiki and also from translations and such :)
Apr 27 19:00:33 * Elonka passes Habj a cookie.
Apr 27 19:00:36 * kim_bruning says, introducing
Apr 27 19:01:33 * kim_bruning passes around a box of HTML cookies
Apr 27 19:01:36 * habj places the cookie in the hard disk, says thanks
Apr 27 19:01:45 heh
Apr 27 19:01:47 if/when we do this in egypt, I might pass around stroopwafels
Apr 27 19:01:51 (symbols of the cabal ;-) )
Apr 27 19:02:14 * habj places stroowafels in kim_brunings hard disk
Apr 27 19:02:29 * kim_bruning <- loses all my data
Apr 27 19:03:06 wow
Apr 27 19:03:15 i r hungry too
Apr 27 19:03:15 so the new admin school is POST-promotion
Apr 27 19:03:18 wowie wow wow
Apr 27 19:03:25 lol
Apr 27 19:03:31 its always been that way
Apr 27 19:03:41 youre thinking of admin coaching
Apr 27 19:03:42 we totally should also offer all those new admins a course on mediation over at medcab :-)
Apr 27 19:03:50 Is the capture off?
Apr 27 19:04:02 this channel is typically logged permanently
Apr 27 19:04:08 Do you want to discuss elsewhere?
Apr 27 19:04:22 No, I want to show you a link, but I don't want it going up on the lectures page.
Apr 27 19:04:28 ok, just msg me :-)
Apr 27 19:04:36 When is the lecture officially "over"?
Apr 27 19:04:39 oh man
Apr 27 19:04:47 Or could we chat about milk and cookies for an hour, and it'd all go in the log? :)
Apr 27 19:04:52 the latter
Apr 27 19:04:55 so all the stupid stuff Ive been aying
Apr 27 19:04:58 the lecture was over a while ago
Apr 27 19:05:07 These bits won't go into the log, though, right?
Apr 27 19:05:10 They haven't before
Apr 27 19:05:14 logging encourages people to stay on topic ;-)
Apr 27 19:05:14 i hope not
Apr 27 19:05:22 err
Apr 27 19:05:26 Okay, can we all move to a room where we can still chat openly, but not be logged?
Apr 27 19:05:32 sure
Apr 27 19:05:35 i never knew my stupidity would be logged
Apr 27 19:05:35 #wikipedia-medcab ?
Apr 27 19:05:38 :|
Apr 27 19:05:41 only other channel I know
Apr 27 19:05:44 yer thatll do
Apr 27 19:05:54 its not like its used for anything major
Apr 27 19:06:00 Works for me.
Apr 27 19:06:01 not typically
Apr 27 19:06:01 lol
Apr 27 19:06:03 only for medcab ;-)
Apr 27 19:06:10 TINC
Apr 27 19:06:10 anything delicate can be discussed privatrely
Apr 27 19:06:11 Seddon, you have the right attitude
Apr 27 19:06:24 Jack_Bauer, you're not that stupid :-)
Apr 27 19:06:30 heh
Apr 27 19:06:44 >chanserv< op
Apr 27 19:06:51 >chanserv< op #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 19:06:52 * ChanServ gives channel operator status to kim_bruning
Apr 27 19:06:57 kim_bruning: IRC channels arnt the place to discussing anything sensitive
Apr 27 19:07:03 just stupid if you do
Apr 27 19:07:12 * kim_bruning has changed the topic to: How to make friends and influence wikis. Wikipedia:Lectures | this channel is permanently logged and posted on-wiki, if you disagree, /part now.
Apr 27 19:07:20 * kim_bruning removes voice from kim_bruning
Apr 27 19:07:23 * kim_bruning removes channel operator status from kim_bruning
Apr 27 19:07:30 Seddon, true :-)
Apr 27 19:08:50 where is the lectures chat?
Apr 27 19:09:09 Seddon: we're in medcab
Apr 27 19:09:39 #wikipedia-en-friends
Apr 27 19:10:58 Microchip08, you're invited to #wikipedia-medcab too
Apr 27 19:11:07 for being a cabal, the medcab is remarkably open ;-)
Apr 27 19:11:23 :D
Apr 27 19:11:27 possibly by now other people have actually rather passed the medcab in secret underhanded dealings ;-)
Apr 27 19:13:45 ...
Apr 27 19:14:00 * Microchip08 will update summary later tonight
Apr 27 19:14:45 Coolness
Apr 27 19:14:49 I'll upload logs later today too
Apr 27 19:15:00 :-)
Apr 27 19:17:57 Did you get the bit about not going against consensus?
Apr 27 19:18:06 I think someone already helped you out :-)
Apr 27 19:19:54 yep, thanks
Apr 27 19:27:27 ++
Apr 27 19:49:09 * AaronSchulz (n=chatzill@wikipedia/VoiceOfAll) has left #wikipedia-en-lectures
Apr 27 19:57:01 * maximr|away has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
Apr 27 20:12:38 * habj has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
Apr 27 20:12:56 * habj (i=habj@wikipedia/habj) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
- ENDING LOGGING AT Sun Apr 27 20:35:23 2008