35:
71:
141:
The written word has the same denigrating, chilling and insulting effect as the spoken word. Incivility drives off editors. It leads to a non-collegial environment. It's destructive to those involved, and to those who watch. It sets a bad example for others, therefore breeding further behaviours.
133:
If you ran a place of business, and you had an employee berating colleagues with obscenities, how long would you allow it to happen? Sure, maybe they're a good producer, they sell lots, but you've had an employee turnover of 75% over the last 3 years ... how productive is that in the long run for
215:
None of the above is new or novel: the test therefore the validity of a civility block is readily and easily measured against the above. If the civility block meets the test in whole, then the block must be upheld. This is for all intents and purposes wholly objective.
134:
your business? Would you permit face-to-face transactions to occur in your workplace in the same manner they often occur on
Knowledge (XXG)? The majority of countries have amended their practices to consider that the written word
121:
What do we do with an editor who is knowledgeable, creates content, and doesn't typically put up with BS? What if they are aggressively so, and has a short fuse - resorting to incivility quickly. Sure, some people
130:" type of personality - but they're usually well-paid to put up with it. Volunteers should never be subjected to it, at all - especially when those volunteers range from noobs to as-old-as-the-project-itself.
138:
as the spoken word (that's why you'll find that if I went up to a female employee and said "hey, nice tits" or e-mailed her saying "hey, nice tits" are both going to be dealt with the same way).
87:
I originally submitted this as part of an ArbComm case (which I don't typically participate in). I believe the concepts are so important, I'm pulling them out to an essay
102:
I personally have two basic operating principles that I have been stating again and again since I started volunteering at
Knowledge (XXG):
50:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
51:
219:
Some argue that long term editors have "rights". However, the argument can be made that long-time editors should know better, and that
211:: this is probably what needs to be better defined for this purpose, although when combined with the above it becomes painfully obvious.
254:
230:
the 4-stage test for civility blocks, and apply them equally across the board. Until then, they grey area causes confusion for
96:
Part of the problem with civility on
Knowledge (XXG) is the lack of desire to actually define the tolerance level for civility
80:
The test of a valid
Civility Block is set against objective standards - if it meets them, the block should not be reversed
21:
205:: "a reasonable person in the circumstances would have known", even if the person themself claims otherwise
55:
189:: "without reasonable cause or excuse...no legitimate purpose behind it" (and I highlight the explain
177:
a vexatious comment or conduct that is known or ought reasonably to be known would would cause offence
249:
17:
43:
172:
either by the outright egregious nature of the action, or the continuation of related actions.
150:
146:
157:
perspective of what is uncivil behaviour leaves a lot to be desired. Where's the line?
243:
226:
ArbComm probably has to choose if it's the former or the latter. They then need to
58:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
165:
127:
106:
everyone has something to add to
Knowledge (XXG), many just don't know it yet
182:
Blocks for incivility can therefore be tested against very simple concepts:
160:
I'm not trying to turn incivility into harassment, however, incivility
237:
Where there's grey areas there will indecision and poor decisions.
193:
excuse distinction - there is no legitimate purpose for incivility)
164:
many aspects with harassment principles. I'm going to borrow from
65:
29:
145:
Now, to the other side of the fence: I used to be active in
168:... indeed, in many cases, harassment is incivility
8:
199:: a single word, or a series of exchanges
52:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
149:(and yes, still spend a lot of time in
7:
113:your own incivility, but it never
56:thoroughly vetted by the community
28:
69:
33:
109:someone else's incivility may
1:
153:. I will clearly state that
271:
175:Incivility is therefore
77:This page in a nutshell:
255:User essays on civility
54:, as it has not been
221:everyone has rights
166:McMaster University
18:User:DangerousPanda
197:comment or conduct
84:
83:
64:
63:
262:
203:reasonably known
128:brilliant tyrant
73:
72:
66:
37:
36:
30:
270:
269:
265:
264:
263:
261:
260:
259:
240:
239:
94:
79:
70:
60:
59:
48:
34:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
268:
266:
258:
257:
252:
242:
241:
213:
212:
206:
200:
194:
136:is as powerful
119:
118:
107:
93:
90:
82:
81:
74:
62:
61:
49:
40:
38:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
267:
256:
253:
251:
248:
247:
245:
238:
235:
233:
229:
224:
222:
217:
210:
209:cause offence
207:
204:
201:
198:
195:
192:
188:
185:
184:
183:
180:
178:
173:
171:
167:
163:
158:
156:
155:some people's
152:
148:
143:
139:
137:
131:
129:
125:
116:
112:
108:
105:
104:
103:
100:
99:
91:
89:
88:
78:
75:
68:
67:
57:
53:
47:
45:
39:
32:
31:
23:
19:
236:
231:
227:
225:
220:
218:
214:
208:
202:
196:
190:
186:
181:
176:
174:
169:
161:
159:
154:
144:
140:
135:
132:
123:
120:
114:
110:
101:
97:
95:
86:
85:
76:
41:
250:User essays
234:editors.
92:On civility
42:This is an
244:Categories
170:to the max
162:does share
228:emphasize
187:vexatious
20: |
115:excuses
111:explain
151:WP:ANI
147:WP:WQA
22:Essays
126:the "
44:essay
16:<
124:like
232:all
246::
223:.
191:vs
179:.
117:it
98:.
46:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.