User talk:Hoarier/old01

From Camera-wiki.org
Jump to: navigation, search
This is the discussion page for Hoarier/old01. Click here to start a new topic.


Discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the article itself, not for discussions about the subject of the article.


Choking

If your login chokes one more time, will you return as "Hoariest"? (Hrm, something doesn't sound right about that.)--Vox 20:38, 14 April 2011 (PDT)

I'd been thinking of Hoarendous. -- Hoarier 21:06, 14 April 2011 (PDT)

Being bold

Hi Hoarier

I just sought the text were I first heard of "be bold" wiki philosophy and linked the new be bold page to that text passage (of You). I remembered it when I found a similar "be courageous" hint in a German wiki, and now I found the related page in Wikipedia. So You didn't necessarily needed to revert that "tampering", it was just a special attempt of honoring Your idea as being established now in this wiki. I made the new page because some makers of this project already became too doubtful concerning changes, because they could be "damaging" to the whole project. But I learned from another wiki: No change, no life. We want a living project, so we can't discourage change. If we won't allow anonymous edits that would be good, but the ones who have decided to become project members shall not be discouraged by doubtful discussions, they should find a place to become creative with their ideas to enrich this camera knowledge base. Be bold, of course carefully, not loosing view for good compromises and consent, and let this wiki grow.

Best regards, U. Kulick 10:52, 29 April 2011 (PDT)

What an extraordinary response.
  1. That was my comment, signed by me. I do not tamper with your comments; you do not tamper with mine. (Are you interested in Wikipedia guidelines? Here's one that covers this.)
  2. You say it was just a special attempt of honoring Your idea. Amazing. Here's my idea, exactly as I wrote it, though with emphasis added: English-language Wikipedia has a policy "Be bold"; it's well intended but it doesn't transfer well to this kind of article here [...]. So, simply, my idea was that "Be bold" was a bad principle for editing that article and others like it. Your "special attempt" to "honor" my idea seems to have been to pretend that I said the opposite.
  3. You say that what you call my idea (actually your idea, and in some ways the opposite of my idea) is established now in this wiki. That's in your article "Be bold". (This is in mainspace. Why? Is "Be bold" something like a photographic process, or a kind of camera?) You've stuck it in Editing guidelines. How is it "established"? There seems to have been no discussion of it whatever. It's merely your idea. If this were Wikipedia, it would certainly not be a "guideline"; it would instead be an "essay" until somebody objected to it (which would happen quickly), whereupon it would be moved to your userspace. (Here is what Wikipedia has to say about essays.)
I stoutly reject your panglossian clichés above about "change". Changes for the better are good; those for the worse are bad; it's as simple as that.
I reject your new, simplistic pastiche of Wikipedia's "Be Bold". The latter is intelligent; you manage to violate it, by (for example) ignoring differences among namespaces.
You are an administrator here. I expect any editor here, and certainly any administrator, to behave responsibly. Some aspects of responsible behavior are:
  1. Reading others' comments carefully. If you don't understand them, ask. Avoid misrepresenting them.
  2. Keeping your hands off others' comments.
  3. Providing edit summaries for all your edits.
  4. Getting agreement for changes of policy before you announce them.
-- Hoarier 16:59, 29 April 2011 (PDT)

I' sorry, I accidentally wrote into Your User page instead into You discussion page. I don't mind it as "tampering" if You'll move our discussion to this talk page where it should belong to. Sorry, my mistake. I also don't agree that we have a change of policy. The "Be bold" article comes from my experience with Camerapedia. We cooperated well, and we had a majority of cases were changes were not reverted but respected and further developed by the others. The first mentioning of "be bold" philosophy was by You (when You were "Hoary"). It was necessary to remind the project community of the "be bold" idea since there were discussions on our mailing list going into the direction: Don't change anything, that's dangerous. If your opinion is that nothing should be changed in this wiki we should lock all articles. I wouldn't like that. We can trust each other as we could in the past. In the article Be bold I wrote nothing else than You: "Changes for the better are good; those for the worse are bad; it's as simple as that." Changes for the better, in my words "improvements". Please read the texts carefully that You criticize. U. Kulick 18:06, 29 April 2011 (PDT)

OK, I've moved the start of the discussion here, putting it in a colored DIV. (Posting it to my user page was obviously just a mistake; I didn't mind.) -- Hoarier 18:19, 29 April 2011 (PDT)
I don't think that anybody has suggested that nothing should change. Certainly I haven't. (Indeed, I hope that CW changes a lot. And while I'm happy to see it expand, the changes I want are definitely not limited to expansion. Actually I'm more worried about quality than quantity.)
Your article, though clearly well intended, strikes me as not well thought out. (Wikipedia's own page on "boldness", which you claim to admire, argues not for boldness but for caution when working on guidelines.) And even if it were well thought out, it would obviously be in the wrong place. I invite you to move it to your own userspace (maybe User:U. kulick/Be bold), to work on it there, and to invite comments on it there. If people like it, then it can go somewhere like Camera-wiki.org:Be bold. (If I don't like it but the majority who comment do like it, then of course it can go there. I am just one editor; my opinion is of no special importance.)
Meanwhile, how about supplying edit summaries? -- Hoarier 18:34, 29 April 2011 (PDT)
Good idea, i boldly added it to our Good practice page. The "Be bold" page can stay where it is now, it's only accessible thru the "Editing Guidelines" category. It isn't a personal opinion page belonging just to my namespace, it is a brief information for all who want to learn more about working on a wiki by walking thru that category, and, as I already said, a reminder for the wiki crew: Hey, changes are wanted, and you can do something for letting them become improvements even if someone is too bold with his/her first edit attempt.U. Kulick 03:44, 30 April 2011 (PDT)