Conflicts between users - Revision history

142.177.82.21 at 18:57, 11 February 2004

2004-02-11T18:57:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:57, 11 February 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Conflicts between users''' must take limited cognizance of their status on the [[Opinion Wiki]] or [[Content Wiki]]. ''These are guidelines for resolving conflicts on either - the rules on each can be expected to vary somewhat.''		'''Conflicts between users''' must take limited cognizance of their status on the [[Opinion Wiki]] or [[Content Wiki]]. ''These are guidelines for resolving conflicts on either - the rules on each can be expected to vary somewhat.'' A process for resolving these is a key part of [[Consumerium Governance]]:

	* Most important: Whoever has the most technological power must be assumed to be in the wrong until they can prove they are right. This is the only way to balance [[sysop power structure]] and is similar to the presumed innocence of those who come up against the state (which has more technological power and social credibility).		* Most important: Whoever has the most technological power must be assumed to be in the wrong until they can prove they are right. This is the only way to balance [[sysop power structure]] and is similar to the presumed innocence of those who come up against the state (which has more technological power and social credibility). ''This is one of many reasons to be [[troll-friendly]].''

	*Typically, only one user will want the dialogue to be public and uncensored (if both wanted it private, it would be in [[use of email\|email]] or [[use of IM\|IM]] obviously). So the wiki form of the dialogue should be handled this way:		*Typically, only one user will want the dialogue to be public and uncensored (if both wanted it private, it would be in [[use of email\|email]] or [[use of IM\|IM]] obviously). So the wiki form of the dialogue should be handled this way:

142.177.82.21 at 18:56, 11 February 2004

2004-02-11T18:56:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 11 February 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Conflicts between users''' must take limited cognizance of their status on the [[Opinion Wiki]] or [[Content Wiki]]. ~~A good rule of thumb is that~~		'''Conflicts between users''' must take limited cognizance of their status on the [[Opinion Wiki]] or [[Content Wiki]]. ''These are guidelines for resolving conflicts on either - the rules on each can be expected to vary somewhat.''

	* Most important: Whoever has the most technological power must be assumed to be in the wrong until they can prove they are right. This is the only way to balance [[sysop power structure]] and is similar to the presumed innocence of those who come up against the state (which has more technological power and social credibility).		* Most important: Whoever has the most technological power must be assumed to be in the wrong until they can prove they are right. This is the only way to balance [[sysop power structure]] and is similar to the presumed innocence of those who come up against the state (which has more technological power and social credibility).

142.177.82.21: guidelines

2004-02-11T18:55:48Z

guidelines

New page

'''Conflicts between users''' must take limited cognizance of their status on the [[Opinion Wiki]] or [[Content Wiki]]. A good rule of thumb is that

* Most important: Whoever has the most technological power must be assumed to be in the wrong until they can prove they are right. This is the only way to balance [[sysop power structure]] and is similar to the presumed innocence of those who come up against the state (which has more technological power and social credibility).

*Typically, only one user will want the dialogue to be public and uncensored (if both wanted it private, it would be in [[use of email|email]] or [[use of IM|IM]] obviously). So the wiki form of the dialogue should be handled this way:

** The user(s) seeking to expose the dialogue must put all relevant exchanges they are aware of, as a subpage to their article page, detailing as completely as possible, their exchange or issue with the other. Examples are [[142.X.X.X/Angela]] and [[142.X.X.X/Tim_Starling]]. Note: These must NOT go in the User: space, else dialogue falls under the control of only one party, at least according to the rules sometimes proposed by [[User:Angela]] (each user controlling their own user space).

*** Suggestion: If a group of users has an issue with another group, that must be handled by each side ''adopting the assumed name and unity of identity that their opponents have accussed them of.'' That is, if three users are considered to be one and treated as one, they must answer as a group - under the name that is assumed to be that of one person. Failure to respect this principle leads to [[outing]] and failures to consult each other and this can only end in [[divide and conquer]] tactics that do not get at the truth, but rather, break up [[faction]]s by technical means.

** Censorship of talk files must be strongly discouraged, and links to the dialogue must be added where talk has been moved. Exploitation of developer or sysop powers, or [[distraction]] tactics (moving some talk while deleting other talk at the same time as part of a lot of edits, as [[User:Angela]] is known to do), must be strongly discouraged as well.

* Dialogue should be left alone, with only factual corrections made without comment. Those making such corrections should avoid assigning motives or doing any [[psychiatry]], leaving "the two" to resolve their issues as much as they can, alone. Let them settle their [[Duelling POV]] issues without intervention.

* Look for a [[troll bridge]], [[political dispute]]s and other ordinary issues that can be resolved or at least characterized more easily.

* Discourage use of labels; Encourage those labelled to turn the label around and make it a mark of pride, e.g. "[[trolls]]". Destroy the cognitive power of those labels everywhere by rendering them morally neutral or even desirable.