There's a proposal to remove the public logging ban. Maybe people will behave more if they know they're being logged publically?

There has always been different logging restrictions for different Wikipedia channels, see here. More openness is better, but there are probably secret channels all over the place, so it might not make any difference.

I've always been in two minds regarding IRC as I've always felt it would be far better to have everything out in the open on Wiki. Of course, there are some times where this can't happen, but the use of IRC should be restricted to such incidents.

It's as bad as the userpage message of "You haz emailz!!!" or whatever version is used!

So I'd support the public logging, even if it won't reduce the MySpacey nature it adds to the project.

They can propose this all they want. James F. won't allow it and unless Freenode fires him, too bad. Even the Arbitration Committee is subservient to James.

Not sure why, but James F. always reminds me of a Butterball Turkey.

Oophh-ah. If you're going to link to a turkey, at least link to a delicious, troll-roasted turkey!

I Mean, Really, Who Cares? Once you grasp the IYΦYΦ† fact that Wikipediots will laugh off, side-step, and violate their sucker-bait BSAM‡ about Transparency in every conceivable way they can possibly dream up, what else is there to know, and who could stand to nose through their shredder-sewage just to drive home the fact?

Jon

† In Your Φace You Φool
‡ Blue Smoke And Mirrors

Sure it's a good idea, but I hope people realise it will do nothing to fix issues like the PS/CB/SC debacle of a few days ago.

Public logging of PMs would be very interesting.

I hate IRC because it's useless and populated by the worst kind of Wikipedians - I think Giano called them "Self-serving Wikipedians".

However, "public logging" is a completely pointless and wholly unenforceable sop. If people want to communicate privately, then they will do so, and Wikipedia has neither the ability nor the right to enforce public discussion - it's a web site, nothing more, nothing less.

Just because people will communicate privately doesn't mean that Wikipedia should provide secret, invite-only star chambers for incompetent admins to play their games.

WP bodkin: Whoah! Where did THAT come from?
IRC cabal: No, nothing to see here, we sorted this out. Let's avoid dramah.
WP bodkin: Hey, how come there is no public discussion? I spy Sooper Sekrit privit dikusnz.
IRC cabal: No, it is all above board on IRC. No secrets here. We play by the rules - ArbCom certified.
WP bodkin: well, as an admin, I should have been part of that discussion, can I join?
IRC cabal: We don't like you. Bog off.

Do you think it's better for the inevitable private discussion to take place entirely in completely private venues where no-one but the clique who owns the (mailing list, chatroom, etc) can see what's going on, or in a medium that, for all its faults, is open to all admins?

First of all, it wasn't open to all admins. It was started by Danny who invited just his own circle of about 60 buddies. Most admins felt the cold chill of not being welcomed.

Second, even when the channel was announced and opened to all admins, some were again made unwelcome. Some were booted without explanation. Some were just run out of the place, generally those who didn't see things the right way.

It was Jimbo and Danny's concoction (those two deserve each other, by the way) and it reflected the values and character of its makers (Kelly Martin included). It was a place where cowards could go to malign others with misrepresented grains of truth and bald face lies, knowing they were safe with friends and wouldn't be held accountable for their words. Spin was not only allowed, it was standard operating procedure. It was run and inhabited not only by vicious predators like Danny and Kelly, but also by sycophantic creatures like HighInBC and Chairboy, who's intellectual horsepower are on a par with cold oatmeal. For all I know, the place hasn't changed much, though FT2 says its all fixed.

It took two years of non-stop protests by Giano, Geogre and crowd to get even minimal progress, where Bishonen wasn't constantly 'encouraged to leave'.

Do you think Wikipedia should be run from an off-site chatroom where people conspire at will (even though they don't see it in those terms) and are not held accountable for their words, and which is inhabited by losers who'd rather hang out on IRC than build an encyclopedia?

Very yes, but public logging of private messages would defeat their purpose of being private.

User:Scarian commented on one of Shankbone's blog posts that I was disrupting a recent admin IRC chat. I have used IRC maybe 3 times in my life, and only once in a Wikipedia-sanctioned area, and that was (I think) about 8 or 9 months ago.



I'm curious where on Wikipedia Review that I "bragged about" an IRC appearance that I didn't even make.

Sure, you can only give so many opportunities for people to redeem themselves, but there are limitless opportunities for other people to defame with lies those irredeemable people. Aren't there, Scarian?

Arguably, he may not mean you were on IRC but rather that he "witnessed, in the admin IRC channel" (read: heard about it in the admin IRC channel and then maybe went on to witness it on-wiki) about a wikipedia account you had.

Not sure why I even bother repeating this, but what the hell...

A case like Greg's is subjective. People form perceptions and opinions by looking at the information and by talking to each other. When the admins go slink off into a hidden chat room with no oversight, they generally cop an attitude that isn't aligned with the community, at least in my experience. I can't tell you how many times I've seen some pimply faced admin come storming onto the wiki full of righteous indignation, only to be left speechless and humiliated with a couple of facts that had been missed or mangled in the admin-irc-star-chamber.

In Greg's case, there seems to be this hard core hatred from a group of admins that precludes any serious attempts at resolution. I suspect these same admins spend a lot of time in the admin chatroom.

Ah, that would make a bit more sense. As a regular human, I wouldn't even have ACCESS to the admin IRC, would I?

Anyway, I'll bet they're talking about my "Feline who watches you..." user name. That was just a brief gag, and completely Somey's fault for creating such a tempting dare. I'm practically INNOCENT of that one!

Greg

P.S. At least somebody thought it was funny, Somey.

banned shortly thereafter.

As were people who even commented on it. Waste of a good sock there in Aldrich Hansson, just to make the following comment:



Of course this got Hansson checkusered by Alison, who banned him indefinitely. Institutionally, WP has about as much sense of humor as the military, which is just one of the many, many reasons it sucks so much, administratively.

They should log it, but it'd be pointless unless there was also a rule against creating secret/passworded admin discussion channels with grounds for immediate de-sysopping, or all you'd get is debates moving into those channels (that already exist, for example #wikipedia2 and the admin channel cant remember name wikipedia-admins or something).

sure, some people would still get around it by making decisions via PM, but those are the people that would just use email anyway (SlimVirgin does that a lot I remember, it'd always be "re your email" or "please email me I need to speak with you" etc