View source for Talk:Writing on WikiWorld

=== What's the consensus? StarPilot ===
Submit all comments and articles to Alle, and he will file it where he thinks it belongs. Anything else will be found to be unacceptable.

==== What is the meaning of ConsensusByDefault? [[User:Alle van Meeteren|Alle van Meeteren]] ====
StarPilot,

I am hurting you in your pride, I am sorry for that. But, I just act in the spirit of ConsensusByDefault. Our problem is that there is not a good procedure to follow if the real consensus appears to be lacking. Then we should have a good talk with eachother, trying to compromise, to find a solution, while respecting eachother. 

I do respect you, but that does not mean I stop my own thinking, if you say something.I gave arguments for what I am doing, but you did not respond to them. Stronger, lately, you just rub out my edits without arguments, and along with my edits you rub out those of Jim Scarver. At least, you have to give a declaration for your rubbing, and that has to be more than a sheer 'simplification'. Otherwise, you are acting as a dictator. 

Your unsigned and undated contribution above is unfair. I have the right to be critical, I have the right to submit my ideas. I reckon that contribution is the consequence of your wounded feelings, and that you will withdraw it. 

09:26, 1 August 2006 (EDT)
==== If Consensus not exist...[[User:KenSchry|KenSchry]] 21:34, 2 August 2006 (EDT) ====
ConsensusByDefault is only applicable if no user objects to your idea, thereby losing consensus. The principle behind ConsensusByDefault: that an action has implied consensus until such a consensus is reached or proved to be incorrect; does not have a clear definition because one is not necessary. There is no "mediating party to enforce the rules", all users are at an equal level. You cannot ask JimScarver to make a decision when you and Star are unable to reach a compromise, though you can request that he join the conversation.

Alle, all page changes are logged in the Page History, meaning that nothing is lost. If StarPilot wishes to remove your content, he has the freedom and ability to do so, just as you have the capability to restore your entry. <b><u>However</u></b>, you both need to consider actually trying to reach a consensus! Star, if you disagree with one or more of Alle's edits, state your complaint and wait for an answer. Alle, you then need to take Star's <i>constructive</i> criticisms (Yes Star, that is a not-so-subtle hint) into consideration, and adjust your content appropriately. You both need to stop using a this as an excuse to snip at each other. ConsensusByDefault is a methodology developed to aid us in a time of lower activity, where reaching a consensus would be difficult with a limited userbase; not a tool to agrieve other users. <br><div align=right>--[[User:KenSchry|KenSchry]] 21:34, 2 August 2006 (EDT)</div>

==== discussion follows [[User:Alle van Meeteren|Alle van Meeteren]] ====
10:26, 3 August 2006 (EDT)<br>
Ken, 

Thanks for acting as a mediating party. Your nor Jim's mediation are enforcing rules, but they have an important function in creating rules. Just ConsensusByDefault is not enough. It is a very practical tool, because by using that we do not need to discuss everything. And with that tool we are creating a quick inside in what keeps us apart. But if this supposed consensus does not exist, discussion has to start. In my opinion, we lack a good method to discuss with eachother. We suffer for this lacking. The openess of WikiWorld, and especialy the concepts of WE and ConsensusByDefault, delivers a good foundation to invent such a method of discussion, I am sure. 

Yesterday, I gave the lead to Jim. But if you have more time than Jim, we can also discuss my ideas about such a discussion system. My discussion with StarPilot was very helpful and stimulating. Indeed it was constructive. But, it seems we crashed, me acting as a bull in a Chinashop, StarPilot as the worried owner of that Chinashop. WikiWorld is not a Chinashop. It is even the purpose that every 'customer' changes the display of the 'goods', being a participant of the WE. If you have a good look, you will see that I am reacting on the other parts of WE, but not in a docile way. Sometimes, a little stubborn, but always open for discussion. 

You sees ConsensusByDefault as a tool handy if there are just a few participants. For me, it is also a handy tool if there are many of us. But, in time, we will experience that.