text:
Wikiversity talk:Recusal

Conflicts with proposal
The Privacy policy states that users can remove use of their own personal information. The proposal for a Recusal policy would contradict this, causing a major conflict.

Also, Wikipedia principles of recusal only require an admin involved in the content editing/crafting of a topic to be recused from using admin ops regarding it - therefore, situations such as an admin deleting something then blocking a person for recreating it, etc, would not apply per that standard. What would apply would be actions like Jtneill's where he uses admin ops to make non-controversial actions to help his students put forth information.

The latter example would seem to negate any possible recusal policy, as custodians are, often, teachers who use the ops to help in their classroom activities.

Finally, in mentorship, mentees, by traditional, allow their mentor to reverse all actions, which makes recusal in those situations null and void. Otherwise, there could be no true mentor/mentee relationship. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Removal of personal information could be considered an emergency. Ottava is not reading the proposed policy correctly. It allows the use of tools in an emergency, and sets out what a custodian should do if faced with an emergency. There is no "major conflict" as Ottava asserts, merely caution. Removing your own personal information by revision deletion obviously creates what the policy calls a "recusal requirement," but because allowing the information to stand could cause immediate and irreparable harm, this would easily fall into "emergency." Therefore the custodian could use the tools, but would be required by the proposed policy to report this at RCA. If the very report could be damaging, then a possible conflict would arise, but that is hard to sustain as a real problem. It would not have applied to any of the cases that have actually arisen, as far as I've seen. The attention called to the edit would be only of import as to custodians who can see deleted edits.
 * This particular issue might be avoided entirely by requiring Wikiversity custodians to use their real names, that's a long term solution that could be very appropriate for Wikiversity. That's not relevant here, it is a different kind of proposal. (It does not negate anonymous editing, but only anonymous assumption of administrative positions, it's already an established principle, and the only issue is how deeply the requirement goes.)

 * The discussion about deletion/blocking is not relevant. Such an action, as part of an original sequence, would not create a recusal requirement in itself. And even with a recusal requirement, a custodian can still act, the policy makes that clear.
 * An example would be this sequence:
 * User creates page with copyvio.
 * Custodian speedy deletes page as copyvio.
 * User gets angry and insults custodian.
 * A block at this point has the appearance of retaliation for protest, and there is therefore a recusal requirement. Generally, a custodian should not block an editor for insulting himself or herself. That's recusal failure, and is usually not an emergency. Another custodian might, but would normally warn first. So suppose this sequence happens:
 * User creates page with copyvio.
 * Custodian speedy deletes page as copyvio, warns user about copyvio.
 * User recreates page.
 * Custodian deletes page and blocks for copyvio.
 * There is no recusal requirement created, except maybe as to future actions with this particular user, it depends on whether or not a reasonable user, reading the history, might suspect bias. Generally, continuing the same action doesn't create a recusal requirement until intervening events have set up a possible appearance of bias.
 * User creates page with copyvio.
 * Custodian speedy deletes page as copyvio, warns user about copyvio.
 * User recreates page and claims that the custodian is biased.
 * Custodian deletes page and blocks for copyvio.
 * This enters the gray area where the policy really kicks in. There is an appearance of bias possible for the user and anyone who supports the user's point of view, perhaps. So the custodian should treat this as possible recusal failure, but there is a clear justification for considering the situation an emergency. The custodian should report the action to RCA. In this case that report would be very simple, nothing more than would already be proper for the block notice on the user talk page. The deletion would already allege copyvio, and the block reason would be simple: repeated creation of copyvio. The custodian should also rigorously refrain from actions likely to inflame the situation, and should apologize for the necessity. It's very quick to do this, unless the custodian gets truly involved and loses his or her own temper, which is what often happens. The custodian, to the extent possible, should encourage the user, and I'd expect a custodian often involved in such actions to create templates that do the job quickly, telling a user how to appeal, offering suggestions for avoiding problems, etc.

 * Generally, Ottava's objections seem to be to absurd interpretations and applications of the policy. I've never seen recusal failure alleged for someone doing something friendly or helpful, only when the action actually offended others and caused harm. If a friend asks a custodian to do something, such as provide a copy of a deleted page, it would only create an appearance of bias if the provision of the copy violated policy, as an example, or was known, in advance, to be offensive to another, in which case the request should probably be presented to RCA. It is difficult to imagine that a marginal case would result in serious consequences to the custodian, unless "marginal cases" became frequent, reversed upon review or resulting in some admonishment, and the custodian did not respond by becoming more careful.

 * I've seen this kind of response from administrators on Wikipedia, and that's the reason why Wikipedia's recusal policy is only primitively developed, admins have resisted it tooth and nail, to the extent of denying it, before ArbComm, so vigorously that I've claimed that ArbComm should suspend the admin privilege for those who deny the requirement. They haven't, and as a result, blatant recusal failure accumulated for years until the situation became so toxic that a massive RfAr resulted in a handful of reprimands, topic bans, and still no peace, continued conflict. We can head that off, right now, by clearly defining recusal failure while we are small. It's already a problem, as the current CR shows.

 * Good recusal policy *protects* administrators who follow it, from becoming needlessly involved in controversy. If an admin is neutral, and acts neutrally, people may protest, and if they do, the admin will, absent emergency, curtail activities in the area. An administrator who blocks may often be attacked as biased, it's routine. By recognizing recusal requirements, the admin will conduct himself or herself in a manner that is designed to avoid escalation of conflict through personal insistence on being right.

 * User is uncivil.
 * Administrator warns.
 * User rails against administrator.
 * Administrator does nothing but respond civilly, but also points out that the warning remains effective.
 * User attacks another user.
 * Administrator blocks, providing evidence, and reports conflict to RCA, a link to the user talk page would probably suffice. Custodian informs user of the report, makes sure that user is instructed how to use an unblock template, and drops the topic. And lets others decide.
 * Accusation of bias or recusal failure is never a reason for unblock, in itself. This, as well, is a common misunderstanding about recusal policy. It's feared that it will be used by trolls to make it impossible to block them. That is actually preposterous, once the policy is understood.

 * Mentorship is a special case, but recusal only applies to reversal of the mentee actions, which is generally understood to apply to other actions. Ottava has in mind a very special and very unusual incident; he'd called a user a "liar," I warned him, he effectively wrote, "who are you to warn me?" and he repeated the incivility, and I blocked him for two hours, to make the point. I was his mentee, so he technically was allowed by that agreement to unblock himself, but only on a finding that my action harmed wikiversity. However, he had other options, clearly, and there was no emergency. He did not report the incident, in spite of the obvious conflict, and he revision-deleted the block log. Recusal policy is for the protection of the community and for the protection of administrators against accusations of bias.

 * A sensible administrator would probably have waited out the two hours, and would have laughed about the event. This sequence, besides the earlier "liar" edits, is what showed me that there were serious problems with Ottava as to his sense of entitlement. But Ottava is not the point here, the policy is. The existence of a possible exception, even if that were acknowledged, does not change the fundamental issues. In any case, what the allowance to Ottava as being my mentor was was not a blanket permission to reverse any action of mine, but a permission to do so without wheel-warring, whereas if I reversed his actions as wheel-warring insistence, I'd have been violating the policy and might have been emergency desysopped just for that. If the action of reversal was itself improper, the permission from me would have no effect, since I have no right to give permission for improper actions. Unblocking himself, absent emergency, was an improper action, and I deliberately made the block very short to avoid a claim of emergency on his part. I also would not have blocked if the cause of block were not clear: repetition of an offense after warning. That's why Jtneil later approved the block as within legitimate custodian discretion.

 * But in no way would recusal violation, itself, have been the sole reason for a complaint about this. Custodians can make mistakes. Far more serious, in fact, was the failure to respond to warnings of incivility, and Ottava continued to repeat that, over the ensuing months. --Abd 20:10, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You know, your accusations of Wikilawyering fall flat when you have been blocked on other projects for it and your responses are mostly long and off-topic. If you don't like it pointed out how your proposal is incompatible with others, find some way to fix the incompatibility instead of attacking others like the above. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:17, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I responded in detail to Ottava's claims of "incompatibility." Is there any other objection? As to what may be seen as an attack above, please point it out, and I assume I will strike it. Even if it is "true." The purpose here is to discuss the policy, and examples are given only to clarify the real situations behind policy proposals and consideration, not to accuse. In particular, the sequence about mentorship was in response to the issue raised by Ottava, when there is only one known example in the entire history of Wikiversity that this could be about. --Abd 20:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You made claims about "emergency" when the word is vague and subjective. Your claims to the rest also leave vague and subjective matters. Then, you don't actually remove many of the incompatibilities.
 * Also, it is odd how you accuse me of not discussing a policy proposal before proposing when you, yourself haven't done that by writing this proposal. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:32, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * This proposal was first made at the custodian page, with plenty of discussion. It was suggested to put it here as a proposed policy. Which we are now discussing. Ottava, please don't raise non-issues, it tempts response that takes us more off-topic. Had you proposed the inactive custodian policy in this manner, there would have been no problem. Instead, you proposed it with an immediate site notice. Yes, "emergency" is subjective. It's subject to discretion, and the community, if necessary, will judge whether there was abuse of discretion. This is really standard regulatory stuff, and it's only lack of real-world experience that makes it seem unfeasible to you. "Emergency," in practice, isn't actually vague. It means that damage not easily repairable is reasonably likely if there is delay. The only problem would be if a custodian routinely claims emergency when there is none. If the custodian nevertheless notifies RCA, whenever "emergency" is necessary as a claim to avoid censure for recusal failure, making a frivolous claim, there is no "emergency" about dealing with the improper claims, because the custodian has avoided harm from unexamined actions, and has disclosed the potential conflict of interest that is behind recusal failure.
 * I have blocked user SoAndSo, in spite of this user claiming that I'm prejudiced against him or her, because the user was posting copyright violations after warning, and it is my opinion [per precedent] that this is adequate as an emergency to allow disregard of recusal requirements. I do not believe that I'm actually biased, but to avoid the appearance of bias, per recusal policy, I am reporting this here, and suggest neutral review of the block, as well as neutral review of any unblock template the user puts up. I have also advised the user how to appeal the block, and consent to any other custodian unblocking if the custodian believes the block is unnecessary, it is not necessary to consult me. Necessary evidence is already placed on the user Talk page, so that both the user, any custodian reviewing, or any other person, may understand the purpose of the block. Thanks. --(Custodian)
 * A custodian may claim emergency under IAR. I don't advise doing it frequently, but the community, if there is objection, will, in later review, decide if the claim was justified. I would expect that only continued failure to respect recusal policy, perhaps by claiming emergency frivolously, would lead to sanctions against a sysop.
 * It's not difficult to understand. The purpose is to increase community confidence in how administrators function, by avoiding the appearance of bias. An additional purpose is to avoid actual bias, the "appearance of bias" is a hedge around the law, so to speak. Nobody is going to get creamed for wandering too close to an edge, just maybe some reprimand or warning not to keep repeating it. I.e., if a custodian does not anticipate an appearance of bias, nobody has alleged bias, and the custodian acts and in hindsight it's possible for someone to assert an appearance of bias, that's not really a problem unless any reasonable person would have recognized the problem. Like, on Wikipedia, an administrator blocked me for violating a ban he had declared, during an RfAr over whether or not he had the right to ban me. No reasonable person would have failed to see that there was an appearance of bias! And there was no emergency, the comment I made allegedly violating the ban was nothing more than a reference to the archive for the article, where a question was answered that had been asked. The edit wasn't offensive or uncivil, there was no copyright violation, outing, BLP violation, etc.
 * No policy substitutes for IAR. IAR is, in fact, the common-law principle of Public Policy. It is not necessary, then, for a policy to cover all contingencies, and the purpose of this proposed Recusal policy is to make explicit what recusal failure means, how to avoid it, and how to deal with emergencies, i.e., where a custodian believes that an action is important, and urgent, and delay could cause damage, more than a temporary appearance of possible bias. By following the suggestions in the article, which include rigorously avoiding incivility with a user, even if the user is hopping mad, any possible damage from an appearance of bias is minimized.
 * I could also give a really good example from my own block history on Wikipedia, where the blocking admin conducted herself perfectly. She was wrong about the block and the underlying situation, but by carefully stepping aside, she avoided any impression on my part that she was truly biased, and turned the situation into the reality: I had to convince the community that there was no harm in unblocking me, and if I'd started screaming "Unfair! Bias! Stupid Admin!" I'd have simply been shooting myself in the foot, since she'd recused. It depersonalized the issue. And I'd made no claim that she was biased before she blocked me, so she really had no special recusal requirements. It was a highly visible block, though, so there wasn't any need to take it to a noticeboard in any case, there was plenty of attention on my Talk page.
 * None of this should be construed as a criticism of a specific sysop. My own view is that when a policy is implemented or clarified, if a sysop has been violating it, an opportunity should exist for the sysop to understand the policy, and prior violations would not be an issue unless the sysop argues against the clarified recusal policy, coupled with an apparent intention to disregard the policy in the future. That might be a problem. Normally, though, there would be specific warning before anyone would be sanctioned for violating recusal policy, unless the violation was egregious. We do not expect custodians to be error-free. --Abd 00:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposal was gutted, with some consequences
With, Darklama, with the edit summary, (simplify/condense this and try to address issues with the proposal), gutted it. This page was started because a detailed coverage of recusal policy, which Wikiversity badly needs, was too much for the page it was originally proposed on. The core of this recusal policy is the concept of emergency action.

As written with Darklama's changes, the policy will not be able to obtain consensus, and if it did, it would be, essentially, an insult to the custodial community, depriving them of the discretion they need to be able to deal with emergent situations, which, by definition, cannot be anticipated, and on-wiki discussion process takes way, way too long, and tends to be disruptive in itself; thus, in reality, custodians, where they seek consensus for an action, do so on IRC or privately, thus creating the impression of a cabal, making the situation worse, rather than better. Discussions to seek consensus may be private, initially, but if users act on this confined consensus, as if it were a community consensus, serious damage can be done, and this has been a relentless problem on Wikipedia. Many of our users have suffered from it.

Custodians will take actions as they see fit, without prior discussion. It's human nature, and it's a necessity. However, this is a wiki. Any action can be undone. A sensible recusal policy insures that any actions that might involve bias will receive a fair review. That is what the language of "emergency" is about. Recusal rules are designed to avoid the appearance of bias. Connected with them is the avoidance of wheel-warring. Wheel-warring is the custodial tool equivalent of revert warring, and the simplest definition means the re-assertion of a prior position by a custodian, after another has reversed it. It is not a simple reversal, and a lot of confusion has been caused by this. Reversing a custodian's action without discussion is possibly a problem, and requires discussion, but it is not necessary that the discussion precede the reversal, if there is fear of immediate harm.

The policy, as I'd written it, requires that the custodian, to bypass recusal requirements, declare an emergency. An emergency doesn't mean that the wiki is on fire. It means that delay will cause harm, in the view of the custodian, harm that might not be easily fixed. Incivility is, in fact, such an emergency, because when incivility is allowed to continue, it drives people way, it entrenches conflicts. It is not enough to prohibit incivility, dispute resolution process must also be provided, but that process cannot proceed in the presence of continued incivility.

We must face the issue of emergency action, not sweep it under the carpet by pretending we can discuss everything in advance. I reverted Darklama, but he has again edited extensively, removing the consideration of emergency, and directly contradicting it. This was not a mere simplification, it was a radical removal of the most important part of what I'd written.

During the recent flap, I referred to this proposed policy many times, I hadn't noticed Darklama's change. No wonder people didn't understand what I was doing! But what I was doing was more respectful of community consensus than routine practice at all the WMF wikis. I was consulting in advance and post-facto. I was explicitly allowing reversal of my action without prior discussion. And I was not supported, but was blamed. And for that reason, if this lack of support had continued without abatement, I'd have resigned, because I'm not willing to support a community as a custodian if the community is not willing to support me. It's mutual.

Just two weeks or so, before my action, SBJ had blocked a user for two days for incivility. That user had previously been blocked for three days. The user had been warned, and had ignored the warnings. And then the user started threatening members of the community with being blocked merely for participating in discussion! (No longer a sysop, the user seems to have an inflated view of his influence, and said, about my comments, that there were two sysops who had promised to block me, and they would do so as soon as they 'came on.') The user was filing massive process, and this user is a skilled wikilawyer, files process on any sysop who warns him, that will come out in a future review. I warned, and immediately a topic ban proposal was filed, from him. Immediate support appeared from users known to be close to him, it's clear that the support was arranged before the proposal was filed. This was a true emergency, and massive disruption was being created, accompanied by more incivility, directed at many users, and here I was, trusted with the tools by our most solid servant, Jtneill.

The three-day block was by an uninvolved custodian. But SBJ was very much involved. I advised him to consult, he might have done so anyway. The block was allowed to stand. If my later block violated the policy, so did his. But when I blocked, SBJ reversed it, rejecting it as excessive. Wikiversity doesn't have an "indef" block option, for some strange reason. I thought "infinite," which it does have, excessive. "Indef" blocks are used on Wikipedia, properly, to indicate a situation without some clear ending point, where discussion may be required. It's not a ban. On Wikipedia, as here, bans require community consensus, and, my opinion, they are a last resort, represent a kind of community failure, as well as individual failure. My one-year block, explicitly stated as indefinite, merely a recognition of the seriousness of the situation, not a ban or a ban proposal, was treated as if I'd bashed his brains out with a banhammer.

Probationary custodianship is designed to test the performance of a candidate. Well, folks, I was tested. How did I do? That's not a question for here, except as it relates to process. To determine if my actions were correct would require careful review. I was involved and therefore under a recusal requirement. I requested review. Was my action reviewed? No. I was not desysopped for that action. It was hardly mentioned. What was the cause of desysopping? It's clear: a certain number of people voted in a way that could be interpreted as lack of confidence, and the comments of people showing something different, made in the original site of the topic ban proposal, were not copied over. The true problem user was allowed to run the process, and then SBJ signed on to it, and why he did that, I truly don't know, except that he'd been opposed to my custodianship from the beginning, for unclear reasons.

Without a clear policy, we get nothing but politics and erratic action, unpredictable. This is causing ongoing damage. I know that my own participation in the business of this community, developing learning resources, has been seriously dented. I know that, without the protections of a stable community, my plans to bring in the whole alternative education community through connections with AERO are on hold. I know that highly competent (and trusted) users from other wikis are staying away from Wikiversity, which has a reputation as a collection of nutbags. If we don't fix this situation, it will not fix itself. --Abd 15:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

 * I agree without a clear policy, we get only politics and erratic actions. What purpose a policy servers and why a problem needs to be addressed should also be clearly explained. Although Jtneil may not have had recusal in mind, I believe what he wrote, so far describes what the purpose of Resucal is the most skillfully. Recent discussions have been scattered over many pages, but I think the issue of acting under the guise of an emergency required this proposal to be rewritten to address when people can act in order to avoid the appearance of acting rashly and risking consequences from the community. Also the need to recuse and the problems that arise from not doing so are not unique to Custodians, so I generalized it a bit more to apply to anyone. -- dark lama  18:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

 * What I don't think has been understood is that emergency action is sometimes needed. Any "official" with discretion will act, and I've seen you act, in advance of "consensus." It's only a problem if the action isn't reviewed, or is in itself seriously harmful, greater than the potential harm of not acting. If the policy does not recognize and guide what to do, if you, as a custodian, perceive an emergency, defined as a situation that, allowed to continue pending discussion and normal process, is perceived by you as more harmful than waiting, then you will be at risk if you act, and you may refrain from using your personal best judgment. And so a dangerous situtation can be allowed to continue. The possible damage of acting includes the possible harm of being perceived as rash. So review process must
 * Consider the action itself, was it legitimate?
 * Determine whether or not to undo the action, or to redo it if it was undone by another custodian.
 * Determine if the harm from an appearance of bias or rash action was greater than the harm from allowing the situation to continue without action.
 * Determine if the action of the custodian was outside community norms for how to handle perceived emergencies.

 * Some have thought that "emergency" should be defined. I've defined it subjectively, as to the perception of the custodian. There is also the perception of the community, upon review. If, on review, the declaration of emergency allowing the custodian to act, in spite of recusal requirements, is found to be "rash," not based on any actual harm being done, for example, or being unnecessary (as with the situation already being handled by another custodian), then the custodian would be reprimanded and advised. If it was grossly out of line, with serious risk of repetition, desysop might be immediate.

 * "Emergency," however, is probably not possible to subjectively define. Particular emergencies may be defined, and they are then not emergencies, as such, but rather anticipated situations, with specific guidance, but real police have discretion. If they act improperly, they can be sanctioned, even to the point of prosecution for egregious violations. But if they see someone about to harm someone else, they do not have to discuss what to do with the community. They may act. That they may act includes the possibility that they may err. In the end, they will be judged on whether or not their decisions were reasonable in context.

 * The determinations are separate. An action might be, in itself, justified, but if there is no emergency, then recusal rules should be followed in themselves. In the other direction, an action might be unjustified, in the end, but the custodian's action found reasonable, given what the custodian, exercising due caution, knew.

 * Review of what happened with me, what I actually did, the situation I was faced with, and how the community responded -- or did not respond! -- all could provide valuable information about the actual problems with recusal policy or lack of same. So I hope to set up that process, but after some time, so that the heat of the moment isn't affecting it. --Abd 00:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 * I understood you think emergency action is sometimes needed and people need to be able to act on their own discretion. I think people need to be advised to exercise due caution, and need to be provided with practical guidance on how to be discrete. I think people should not be advised to do things which the community will likely reject, such as act first and ask questions later.

 * People can agree that quick action is a good idea even if they may be unable to agree what actions should be taken. People can agree that a situation is harming Wikiversity, even if they may be unable to agree what should be done about it. I try to do my best to look for common ground, even if I may not be under any obligation to recuse, before I act. I think the common ground to look for here before doing anything should be:

 * *People appear to agree that a situation is harming Wikiversity,
 * *People appear to agree that any or some action is better than allowing the current situation to continue unchanged, and
 * *People appear to agree that quick or immediate action should be taken.

 * I think whether "agree" is the same as or similar to "consensus" may be a distraction. I do not necessarily agree or disagree with the conclusion you drew that by agree I mean consensus. One small possible distinction that I guess I need to express is an agreement can happen without it being intended and without it being necessarily what people were focused on when trying to establish a consensus.

 * I hope you can recognize that what I suggest are things to review before acting, while what you have suggested are things to review after acting. I think without reviewing before acting, any review afterwards is more likely to be answered with "No, Undo, Greater harm was caused, and actions were outside community norms." I think by encouraging people to self-review the above things before acting there is no need to mention emergency at all. -- dark lama  15:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

title: Wikiversity talk:Recusal


text: File:Fluid at rest rigid body motion.png

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
User talk:Vanished user adhmfdfmykrdyr/IRC log - 23/11/2010

As a note, I never gave permission. SB Johnny changed the IRC topic from no public logging to being logged, and Laura demanded it. However, Laura is fun so, whatever. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


text: User:Caprice

title: User:Caprice


text:
User:Benrattray/Bike vs Brain

Source:

title: User:Benrattray/Bike vs Brain


text:
Wikiversity talk:Administrator notices

Speedy delete
This seems to be a potentiall useful redirect to me - for someone coming from another wiki project and expecting to find such a page, they are directed to the local project equivalent. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

title: Wikiversity talk:Administrator notices


text:
User talk:Banakusum

 Hello Banakusum, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --La comadreja formerly AFriedman RESEARCH (talk) 03:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

 Hello , we are the Baah and Bahh twins and we'd both like to welcome you to Wikiversity. While you sit back and explore Wikiversity, enjoy some of our fresh goat milk. You can help us learn by creating new learning resources or help us by improving the guided tours and other exploration tools. We look forward to seeing you around. Baaaahbye for now.

title: User talk:Banakusum


text: User:Benrattray/Health, not what you think


text:
Talk:Motivation and emotion/About

=Video=

Need to record an update with some students around James.. Leighblackall 04:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Motivation and emotion/About


text:
User:Vanished user adhmfdfmykrdyr/IRC log - 23/11/2010

Session Start: Tue Nov 23 06:46:26 2010 Session Ident: #wikiversity-en �03 [06:46] * Now talking in #wikiversity-en �03 [06:46] * Topic is 'Welcome to the English Wikiversity IRC channel: http://en.wikiversity.org | For assistance ask your question and WAIT for an answer or ask at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium | No public logging | Discuss http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Sandbox_Server | CVN channel at #cvn-wv-en�' �03 [06:46] * Set by darkcode on Sun Jan 24 00:54:33 [06:46] #wikiversity-en url is http://en.wikiversity.org/ �05 [06:46] -ChanServ- [##australia] Welcome to ##australia! [06:46]  http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Ottava_Rima �05 [06:46] -ChanServ- �mattis^� is not on �#aboutus�. [06:46]  Fun times �03 [06:48] * Joins: Erkan___Yilmaz_ (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de) �02 [06:48] * Quits: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de�) (Read error: Connection reset by peer�) [06:50]  Ottava, some people want things, others want other things or same things [06:50]  well, world is full of desires �06 [06:51] * Erkan___Yilmaz_ looks for some monks with no desires on this Earth [06:55]  heya Erkan! �06 [06:55] * SB_Johnny knew Erkan was online because his skype kept making noises :-) [06:56]  hi SB_Johnny [06:56]  hehe, wait until the clones of Erkan appear [06:56]  http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:Thekohser#No_consensus_to_unblock [06:56] but months with no desires won't desire you either Erkan [06:56]  you should also get some SB_Johnny - they might be helpful at the farm :-) [06:56] err but monks [06:56]  darkcode, I miss your wisdom .-) [06:57]  so Erkan: my dog is being neutered today [06:57] poor doggy [06:57]  oh yeah, I need clones on the farm [06:58]  darkcode: his adopted sister would have almost certainly killed him if he started humping her [06:58]  (she's a lot bigger) [06:59]  it's actually good timing, because he just started lifting his leg a couple weeks ago [06:59]  hehe [06:59] <Erkan___Yilmaz_> poor dogs [06:59] <Erkan___Yilmaz_> I wonder what people would do if someone would start to neutralize humans :-) �03 [06:59] * Joins: t_thanos1 (~thanos@150.140.215.111) [06:59] <Erkan___Yilmaz_> iassou t_thanos [06:59] <SB_Johnny> well, Nula is spayed, so she's definitely "not that kind of girl" [07:00] <SB_Johnny> and she really would kill him �02 [07:00] * Quits: t_thanos (~thanos@wikiversity/assassingr�) (Disconnected by services�) �03 [07:00] * t_thanos1 is now known as t_thanos �02 [07:00] * Quits: t_thanos (~thanos@150.140.215.111�) (Changing host�) �03 [07:00] * Joins: t_thanos (~thanos@wikiversity/assassingr) [07:00] <SB_Johnny> though it's very sweet, she's obviously missing him today [07:02] <Erkan___Yilmaz_> what does your daughter say to this all? she understands already? �06 [07:03] * darkcode has Erkan neutered to find out �03 [07:06] * Joins: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de) �02 [07:06] * Quits: Erkan___Yilmaz_ (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de�) (Read error: Connection reset by peer�) [07:08] <Erkan___Yilmaz> darkcode, thanks for the experience, how can I make a revanche? [07:08] <Erkan___Yilmaz> transplant the parts which I got cut off on you? ;-) [07:08] <Erkan___Yilmaz> let's see: on your nose perhaps? [07:09] <Erkan___Yilmaz> sorry guys and girls normally we are just like that [07:09] <Erkan___Yilmaz> educational stuff will begin soon after this conversation �02 [07:12] * Quits: Ottava (~no@68-245-121-110.pools.spcsdns.net�) (Read error: Connection reset by peer�) �03 [07:13] * Joins: Ottava (~no@68-245-121-110.pools.spcsdns.net) [07:15] <t_thanos> γεια σου Erkan___Yilmaz [07:15] <t_thanos> hello guys. How are you keeping? [07:15] <Ottava> Who are you, thanos? [07:16] <t_thanos> I was assassing in el.wv but decided to use my real name [07:16] <Erkan___Yilmaz> t_thanos, busy all time :-) I quit my job and am starting my own business in January [07:16] <Erkan___Yilmaz> much things do since in germany the state really wants all kind of legal papers [07:16] <t_thanos> (yeah, I outed myself) �06 [07:16] * Erkan___Yilmaz embraces t_thanos for outing himself [07:16] <t_thanos> *assassingr �06 [07:17] * Erkan___Yilmaz also places some wet kisses on his cheek [07:17] <Ottava> http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:Recusal#Conflicts_with_proposal [07:17] <Ottava> Abd sure loves to rant [07:17] <Ottava> assassingr? That name sounds familiar [07:17] <t_thanos> I used to lurk here about two years ago [07:18] <t_thanos> I'm a custodian in el.wv but inactive these last years [07:19] <Ottava> hmm [07:19] <SB_Johnny> oh, heya assasingr ;-) [07:19] <t_thanos> how are things going in en.wv? I was thinking these last days of starting some notes on Probability Theory [07:20] <t_thanos> Ottava: check my irc mask info to be sure [07:20] <Ottava> okay [07:21] <t_thanos> on my other question: how's the activity in en.wv? Do you need a couple of hands? [07:22] <Ottava> t_thanos - we always do �02 [07:22] * Quits: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de�) (Read error: Connection reset by peer�) [07:22] <Ottava> and if Abd gets his way, we wont have any acive admin [07:22] <Ottava> so �03 [07:22] * Joins: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de) [07:23] <t_thanos> and has the dust settled after that thing with Moulton? [07:23] <Ottava> Nah, he was replaced by Abd [07:23] <Ottava> http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Ottava_Rima [07:23] <Ottava> have fun reading [07:23] <t_thanos> hahaha, something tells me that I'll soon find out who this Abd guy is �02 [07:39] * Quits: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de�) (Read error: Connection reset by peer�) �03 [07:39] * Joins: Erkan___Yilmaz_ (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de) [07:39] <Ottava> wb Erkan [07:43] <Erkan___Yilmaz_> thx Ottava �03 [07:46] * LauraHale is now known as Laura|HotCoCo �06 [07:49] * Ottava steals Laura's coco [07:49] <Ottava> or cocoa* �03 [07:55] * Joins: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de) �02 [07:55] * Quits: Erkan___Yilmaz_ (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de�) (Read error: Connection reset by peer�) �03 [08:11] * Joins: Erkan___Yilmaz_ (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de) �02 [08:11] * Quits: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de�) (Read error: Connection reset by peer�) �02 [08:11] * Quits: t_thanos (~thanos@wikiversity/assassingr�) (Quit: Leaving.�) �03 [08:12] * Joins: t_thanos (~thanos@wikiversity/assassingr) [08:21] <Ottava> wb t_thanos [08:21] <Ottava> Wiki working for you yet? [08:21] <Ottava> or is Europe still dead? �02 [08:31] * Quits: Erkan___Yilmaz_ (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de�) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds�) �02 [08:31] * Quits: Ottava (~no@68-245-121-110.pools.spcsdns.net�) �03 [08:32] * Joins: Ottava (~no@68-245-121-110.pools.spcsdns.net) �03 [08:34] * Laura|HotCoCo is now known as LauraHale [08:34] <Ottava> http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity%3ACommunity_Review%2FOttava_Rima&action=historysubmit&diff=650604&oldid=650600 [08:36] <t_thanos> kinda working, but it's taking a lot of time [08:37] <Ottava> Abd was saying I was buddies with Darkcode and that I was being sneaky by asking opinions on the matter in chat before acting [08:37] <Ottava> I think it is rather obvious that Darkcode and I aren't friends [08:37] <Ottava> and that there was nothing sneaky about illiciting opinions on a matter from other active users �01 [08:39] <LauraHale> It is sneaky when you do it to circumvent channels and don't provide access to the discussion in order to provide context for further actions. [08:39] <Ottava> circumvent which channels? �01 [08:40] <LauraHale> And Ottava, for the record, I consider WMF chatrooms public so if I'm in here, I don't feel the need to ask you for permission to publish your logs. [08:40] <Ottava> well, the topic says no public logs [08:40] <Ottava> so change the topic [08:40] <Ottava> :P �01 [08:40] <LauraHale> The channel mode is not +s. The room is public. �01 [08:40] <LauraHale> So the topic is just like anything else: Advisory. [08:40] the channel topic says no public logging [08:40] <Ottava> Doesn't matter, #wikipedia chats do the same thing [08:40] <Ottava> same as Commons [08:41] <Ottava> etc [08:41] <Ottava> Freenode as a rule says not to publish logs publicly [08:41] <Ottava> It is in the TOS when you log in [08:41] <Ottava> www.freenode.com/policy ? [08:41] <Ottava> I don't remember the link �01 [08:41] <LauraHale> If you don't want your comments to be shared, then don't share them because this is public. [08:41] <Ottava> Not really �01 [08:41] <LauraHale> And it really sounds like you're using IRC to circumvent what is happening on Wikiversity. [08:41] <Ottava> having more than one person makes a public not �01 [08:42] <LauraHale> "I want to avoid having a log of what I'm doing so I'll go around the whole wiki transparency thing by doing it on IRC! Score.  People can't see my actions." [08:42] <Ottava> So, you are saying that I should ask Darkcode on his user talk page how long someone should be blocked and the ups and downs of each thing? [08:42] <Ottava> and also put up his IP information attained from Wikipedia in public? [08:42] <Ottava> and reveal in public what comments were oversighted over there? [08:42] <Ottava> >.> �01 [08:42] <LauraHale> If it involves Wikiversity and policy discussion are based on IRC, you either provide the logs or summarize it for those not there. [08:43] <Ottava> Plus, the privacy policy passed saying IRC logs aren't permitted [08:43] <Ottava> so �01 [08:43] <LauraHale> Anything else is circumventing and you're doing it intentionally. [08:43] <Ottava> you could have opined there [08:43] <Ottava> We have no rules against circumventing anything [08:43] <Ottava> otherwise, Abd would be banned for working on WR so much �01 [08:43] <LauraHale> As for the IP address issue, then you get a cloak. [08:43] <Ottava> Laura, I was refering to KBlott's IP [08:43] <Ottava> o.O �01 [08:43] <LauraHale> I'm referring to you. [08:43] <Ottava> I wasn't [08:43] <Ottava> There is sensitive information that is not made public �01 [08:44] <LauraHale> All the criticism on the page you were whining about involving you seem pretty spot on. [08:44] <Ottava> ArbCom, OTRS, CUs, OS, and the rest have private emails and the rest for discussions [08:44] <Ottava> and the admin have their own IRC room �01 [08:44] <LauraHale> Ottava: IP addresses are not particularly sensitive. [08:44] <Ottava> #wikimedia-admin [08:44] you don't need logs to summarize thats exactly why there is no need for public logs �01 [08:44] <LauraHale> If they don't want it logged, set +s. �01 [08:44] <LauraHale> And invite only. [08:44] <Ottava> invite only isnt necessary for non public posting [08:45] <Ottava> Freenode says hat [08:45] <Ottava> that �01 [08:45] <LauraHale> I think the whole thing on Wikiversity involving you braying on about the logging issue on IRC being private is bullshit designed to inocculate yourself from behavior that the community would not support. [08:45] <Ottava> By the way, small wiki task force uses IRC to work with all sorts of admin issues [08:45] <Ottava> Well, the privacy policy says it is private [08:45] <Ottava> so �01 [08:45] <LauraHale> And if you assume that people will follow that, and stupidly operate on the assumption that people will honor that, you're asking for the trouble you're getting. [08:45] <Ottava> change it if you feel so strongly about it [08:46] <Ottava> "You deserve to be raped because you dress like a whore" [08:46] <Ottava> o.O �01 [08:46] <LauraHale> Hi! I'm Ottava and I'll rape people because I can do it where others can't hold me accountable for my actions! [08:46] <Ottava> Where did I rape anyone? [08:46] <Ottava> o.O [08:46] <SB_Johnny> that's enough, please �01 [08:47] <LauraHale> <Ottava> "You deserve to be raped because you dress like a whore" [08:47] <SB_Johnny> both of you :-) �06 [08:47] * Ottava gives Laura a muffin �01 [08:47] <LauraHale> No thanks. [08:47] <Ottava> I was saying that was your argument above, mind you �01 [08:47] <LauraHale> Your analogy is flawed. �01 [08:47] <LauraHale> I'm using my argument. [08:47] <Ottava> You sure are �01 [08:47] <LauraHale> My argument is that you're using these rules to hide your bad behavior. [08:47] <Ottava> Doesn't mean I have to use it. [08:47] <Ottava> The IRC logs don't show any bad behavior by me [08:48] <Ottava> quite the opposite �01 [08:48] <LauraHale> That's a matter of perspective. [08:48] <Ottava> I was tired of an admin using blocks to bully JWS [08:48] <Ottava> JWS came to me with the concern �01 [08:48] <LauraHale> I think the IRC logs show you doing exactly what I think you're doing. [08:48] <Ottava> I acted by telling Adambro there would be a problem if it continued �01 [08:48] <LauraHale> If you think that the logs show that you're not being bad and that you're totally transparency and operating in good faith, that's your problem. [08:49] <Ottava> It isn't a problem at all �01 [08:49] <LauraHale> It just demonstrates that you'll continue to have problems because you're so caught up in your world view that you can't begin to percieve how others see you and respond accordingly. �01 [08:49] <LauraHale> Certainly seems like you see things this way and assume that the problem is never with you but others... [08:49] <Ottava> So, you think a user has the right to constantly block someone over trivial things when that user had a 2 year negative relationship with the user? �03 [08:49] * ChanServ changes topic to 'Welcome to the English Wikiversity IRC channel: http://en.wikiversity.org | For assistance ask your question and WAIT for an answer or ask at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium | Discuss http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Sandbox_Server | CVN channel at #cvn-wv-en�' �01 [08:50] <LauraHale> Ottava: Can you see where others might see your actions as problematic? [08:50] <SB_Johnny> public logging is now permitted [08:50] <Ottava> I asked for him to merely limit his blocks to 24 hours if they dont have discussion first [08:50] <Ottava> how evil is that �01 [08:50] <LauraHale> Ottava: Can you see where others might see your actions as problematic? [08:50] <Ottava> I can see where lots of people can see lots of things as lots of stuff �01 [08:50] <LauraHale> Ottava: Irrelevant to the issue. Get back on track. Answer my question. Can you see why people may view your actions as problematic and disruptive to the community? [08:51] <Ottava> I already said yes �01 [08:51] <LauraHale> And how do you plan to address that going forward? [08:51] <Ottava> Address what? [08:51] <Ottava> A discussion with Adambro that ended a long time ago? [08:51] <Ottava> My following standards in putting up policy discussions? [08:51] <Ottava> My discussing with Darkcode in chat on what to do and seeking advice? [08:51] <Ottava> o.O �01 [08:52] <LauraHale> And no, you didn't answer that question. You didn't say "I see how others see my actions as disruptive." You said: "I see that people have different perspectives on random things." �01 [08:52] <LauraHale> How do you plan to change your actions to help with the perception that you're not acting in good faith towards the greater wikiversity community? [08:52] <Ottava> No I didnt, I said : "I can see where los of people can see lots of things as lots of stuff" [08:52] <Ottava> Please don't misquote me [08:53] <Ottava> Where am I not acting in good faith to the Wikiversity community in general? [08:53] <Ottava> Out of the past month's over 150 logged actions �01 [08:53] <LauraHale> Ottava: You still didn't say "I see how people view me as not acting towards the public good on Wikiversity." [08:53] <Ottava> how many of them are evil? �01 [08:53] <LauraHale> Ottava: Irrelevant to the conversation at hand. [08:53] <Ottava> No, it isn't [08:53] <Ottava> I want a figure [08:53] <Ottava> tell me how many �01 [08:53] <LauraHale> Where did I characterize your edits as evil. [08:53] <Ottava> Well, damaging to the community is the standard definition of an immoral act �01 [08:53] <LauraHale> You want me not to misquote you and then you attribute incorrect ideas to me. [08:53] <Ottava> therefore, evil �01 [08:53] <LauraHale> We've thus reached what you're talking about. [08:53] <Ottava> I asked you a new question [08:53] <Ottava> I didnt attribute anything to you in it [08:54] <Ottava> I want to know how many of my past month logged actions are improper [08:54] <Ottava> inappropriate [08:54] <Ottava> wrong [08:54] <Ottava> misguided [08:54] <Ottava> unfortunate [08:54] <Ottava> unexplainable [08:54] <Ottava> awful [08:54] <Ottava> idiotic �01 [08:54] <LauraHale> Ottava: So now that we've got a real example here of you doing things that the community would consider bad faith, how will you go abotu fixing it? [08:54] <Ottava> any negative characterization you want [08:54] <Ottava> and multiple negative characterizations [08:54] <Ottava> have at it! �01 [08:54] <LauraHale> Ottava: Still misrepresenting what I said and making a whole bunch of assumptions. [08:54] <Ottava> What thing is bad faith? [08:54] <Ottava> I never made any assumptions about what you -said- but asked you to provide new information �01 [08:55] <LauraHale> Because you're making totally false assumptions about what I said not based on the text of what I said. [08:55] <Ottava> I haven't made any assumptions about you �01 [08:55] <LauraHale> Therefor, you're reinforcing the concept of bad faith in you. [08:55] <Ottava> You can provide any answer to any magnitude �01 [08:55] <LauraHale> Ottava: You assumed I was commenting on your edits being evil. �03 [08:55] * ChanServ changes topic to 'Welcome to the English Wikiversity IRC channel: http://en.wikiversity.org | For assistance ask your question and WAIT for an answer or ask at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium | Discussions may be logging for public use | Discuss http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Sandbox_Server | CVN channel at #cvn-wv-en�' [08:55] <Ottava> Please provide an action demonstrating bad faith [08:55] <Ottava> may be logging? [08:55] <Ottava> >.> �03 [08:55] * ChanServ changes topic to 'Welcome to the English Wikiversity IRC channel: http://en.wikiversity.org | For assistance ask your question and WAIT for an answer or ask at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium | Discussions may be logged for public use | Discuss http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Sandbox_Server | CVN channel at #cvn-wv-en�' [08:55] <Ottava> May be logged* [08:55] <Ottava> there we go �01 [08:55] <LauraHale> Ottava: [08:52] <Ottava> Please don't misquote me [08:53] <Ottava> how many of them are evil? �01 [08:55] <LauraHale> There. �01 [08:56] <LauraHale> Bad faith. [08:56] <Ottava> I would like to know how many of my actions are evil [08:56] <Ottava> bad faith in myself? [08:56] <Ottava> o.O [08:56] <Ottava> Lets make this simple �01 [08:56] <LauraHale> Two totally separate sets of criteria. One for me: LAURA DO NOT MISQUOTE ME! One for you: I'LL MISREPRESENT YOUR VIEWS! [08:56] <Ottava> provide one example of bad faith [08:56] <Ottava> Then we can discuss why �01 [08:56] <LauraHale> [08:55] <LauraHale> Ottava: [08:52] <Ottava> Please don't misquote me [08:53] <Ottava> how many of them are evil? �01 [08:56] <LauraHale> Ottava: Discuss. [08:56] <SB_Johnny> good lord [08:56] <Ottava> I'm still waiting for an example o.O �01 [08:57] <LauraHale> [08:55] <LauraHale> Ottava: [08:52] <Ottava> Please don't misquote me [08:53] <Ottava> how many of them are evil? [08:57] <Ottava> Do I need to pick the example? �01 [08:57] <LauraHale> You told me not to misquote you [08:57] <Ottava> Yes, I did �01 [08:57] <LauraHale> Ottava: I just provided an example. [08:57] <SB_Johnny> assuming bad faith at every opportunity is bad faith [08:57] <Ottava> No, Im refering to on wiki [08:57] <Ottava> >.< [08:57] <Ottava> And before this conversation �01 [08:57] <LauraHale> Ottava: And then you followed it up by totally misrepresenting what I said. [08:57] <Ottava> >.< �01 [08:57] <LauraHale> Ottava: I don't give a crap about the wiki at this second. It is irrelevant to the discussion. [08:57] <Ottava> come on now, back to the topic. You said I deserve the CR in many more and different words [08:57] <Ottava> so lets get to why �03 [08:58] * Joins: eadthem (~coarsco@pdpc/supporter/active/eadthem) �01 [08:58] <LauraHale> Ottava: What you're doing is reinforcing the idea that you don't operate in good faith. [08:58] <Ottava> Name an example in the CR showing recent bad faith and community destruction �01 [08:58] <LauraHale> Ottava: Irrelevant. [08:58] <Ottava> o.O �01 [08:58] <LauraHale> Ottava: The issue at hand is your behavior. [08:58] <Ottava> So, you wont explain where I acted in bad faith? [08:58] <Ottava> How am I supposed to learn? �01 [08:58] <LauraHale> [08:57] <LauraHale> [08:55] <LauraHale> Ottava: [08:52] <Ottava> Please don't misquote me [08:53] <Ottava> how many of them are evil? [08:58] <Ottava> You wont point out specifics �01 [08:58] <LauraHale> Ottava: There. [08:58] <Ottava> That isn't on Wiki [08:58] <Ottava> >.< �01 [08:58] <LauraHale> Ottava: Which is irrelevant. �01 [08:58] <LauraHale> The IRC chat room is part of the wikiversity community when it suits you. [08:59] <Ottava> Okay, fine [08:59] <Ottava> I committed bad faith above [08:59] <Ottava> I was wrong [08:59] <Ottava> now �01 [08:59] <LauraHale> But now! No! It isn't because it doesn't suit yoru cause. [08:59] <Ottava> can we go onto a directly on en.wikipedia.org example? [08:59] <Ottava> preferably one found - http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Ottava_Rima �01 [08:59] <LauraHale> Ottava: Good. Now, how will we move on and modify our behavior both in IRC and on the wiki. [08:59] <Ottava> or perhaps a new one that you just discovered? �01 [08:59] <LauraHale> Ottava: Nope. I'm not involved with that We're still on the IRC topic and your general issues regarding how your behavior is perceived. [09:00] <Ottava> O.o �01 [09:00] <LauraHale> Ottava: So your bad faith comment where you mischaracterized my remarks as implying you were evil... �06 [09:00] * Ottava has greater sympathy for Moulton [09:00] <Ottava> I never said you implied I was evil [09:00] <Ottava> I implied I was evil �01 [09:00] <LauraHale> you can see how people will percieve your actions as not in good faith? [09:00] <Ottava> I am evil [09:00] <Ottava> Go figure �01 [09:00] <LauraHale> Ottava: You need to reread. [09:01] <Ottava> Well, people perceive evil people as evil, so it would make sense for them to have "bad" in their actions �01 [09:01] <LauraHale> You implied that by my saying that your actions are read by many as not being in the best interest of the community made you evil. [09:01] <Ottava> No, I said the standard definition would do such �01 [09:01] <LauraHale> Ottava: People may percieve that you are the second coming of Jesus Christ [09:01] <Ottava> I don't presume what you think of me [09:01] <Ottava> Scary [09:01] <Ottava> Wait, SB Johnny probably does and that is why he hates me. The damn athiest. :P �01 [09:01] <LauraHale> Unless some one sayd that you're evil, don't go around presuming that they think you do and don't act that way. [09:02] <Ottava> Oh, I get told I am evil a lot [09:02] <Ottava> you should see the hatemail I get from my religion column �01 [09:02] <LauraHale> Ottava: Then have you considered asking why people percieve you that way? [09:02] <Ottava> a 90 year old woman sent me a handwritten letter saying tha I am responsible for all the evil in the world and signed it "fuck all churches" �01 [09:02] <LauraHale> Ottava: So if a number of people on Wikiversity consider that you're acting in bad faith, what have you done to demonstrate differently? [09:02] <Ottava> Well, she made it clear that Catholics are responsible for the BTK killer, for her not getting into college, and a blizzard that caused her to get sick as a child �01 [09:03] <LauraHale> Ottava: Frankly, based on our conversation here, I really think that those people are right. You are disruptive, rude and a detriment the health of the whole community. [09:03] <Ottava> Well, I would point out an example of being criticized by he same people got me the praise of the Foundation during the Jimbo matter [09:03] <Ottava> So, conflicting praise/criticism [09:04] <Ottava> And since I am a sucker for Jimbo and the Foundation, I tend to be persuaded that way �01 [09:04] <LauraHale> Ottava: Not the Foundation. �01 [09:04] <LauraHale> Ottava: Read what I said. I said WIKIVERSITY. [09:04] <Ottava> Well, Jimbo, Sue Gardner, Sj, Cary Bass, and a few others praised my Wikiversity work during that time [09:04] <Ottava> stuff that Abd said was bad �06 [09:04] * Ottava shrugs �01 [09:04] <LauraHale> Ottava: Respond to what I'm actually writing instead of what you either think I'm saying or what you just want to pontificate about. [09:04] <Ottava> I'm Catholic. We pontificate. [09:04] <Ottava> Its why the Protestants hate us. �01 [09:05] <LauraHale> Ottava: You can produce valuable work but not help the greater community. �01 [09:05] <LauraHale> Ottava: Wow! I'm a Roman Catholic. �01 [09:05] <LauraHale> And I'll tell you that you're certainly pontificating. [09:05] <Ottava> So, the past 150 actions in the past month didn't help the community at all? [09:05] <Ottava> Hmm �01 [09:05] <LauraHale> Ottava: Describe the actions. [09:05] <Ottava> I do enjoy pontificating �01 [09:05] <LauraHale> How did you help build the community? [09:05] <Ottava> http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Ottava+Rima [09:05] <Ottava> Lets see [09:06] <Ottava> deleted lots of vandalism �01 [09:06] <LauraHale> No, tell me what you did to help grow the community. [09:06] <Ottava> cleaned up categories �01 [09:06] <LauraHale> Ottava: That's subjective the vandalism. The community review of your actions highlights problems with your deltions. [09:06] <Ottava> Oh, what I did? Lets see, I found a group of English Literature scholars and introduced them to Wikiversity, and they will be putting information up [09:06] <Ottava> Problem with one deletion �01 [09:06] <LauraHale> Ottava: Cleaning up categories is not community growth but content improvement and organization. �01 [09:06] <LauraHale> Ottava: The latter is what you should have said first. [09:06] <Ottava> Never gardened before? Trimming can promote growth [09:06] <Ottava> Tell her, SB Johnny [09:07] every little bit helps as long as nobody leaves as a result �01 [09:07] <LauraHale> That you put actual community growth third speaks volumes. [09:07] <Ottava> Im going down the list of things I did in order [09:07] <Ottava> o.O �01 [09:07] <LauraHale> And editing is important and so is cleaning... but there are whole balance issues. [09:08] better organization means people can find things and people will help which allows the community to grow instead of leaving out of disinterest �01 [09:08] <LauraHale> Ottava: Not the best order when you're trying to sell how you're a positive asset to growing the community. [09:08] <Ottava> I don't try to sell anything [09:08] <Ottava> Maybe I would get more respect if I razzle dazzled everyone. [09:08] <Ottava> Put on a show. �01 [09:08] <LauraHale> darkcode: I agree. I just wouldn't list it first given how active Ottava is in talking about Wikiversity and its various policy issues. [09:08] <Ottava> Suck up, praise people falsely, and all the other things. [09:08] <Ottava> Honesty doesn't seem to have the same charm. [09:09] <Ottava> SB Johnny, did you know that you are 100% delightful and entertaining? <3 �01 [09:09] <LauraHale> Ottava: Maybe you'd get more respect if: 1) You didn't misrepresent what people said, 2) Responded to what people actually said instead of what you think they said/want to respond to that isn't there, 3) Worked with more people inside the community when it came to governance, 4) Weren't as involved with people who didn't want to see WMF go down. [09:10] <Ottava> Who said I wanted respect? [09:10] <Ottava> If I wanted respect, why would I spent 4 hours a day doing shit work? [09:10] <Ottava> The stuff no one cares about [09:10] <Ottava> That makes us look awful when no one does it? [09:10] <Ottava> There isn't any glory in it [09:10] <Ottava> It takes away from my own work. �01 [09:10] <LauraHale> Ottava: If people don't respect you, it makes your work that much harder. [09:10] <Ottava> I don't want to be respected. [09:10] <Ottava> I don't care about what people think. �01 [09:11] <LauraHale> Ottava: You generally get more work done when you can work with others. [09:11] <Ottava> I work not because of others but because someone has to. It is my own purgation to have to put up with the bowels of hell. [09:11] <SB_Johnny> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w536Alnon24 [09:11] <Ottava> I've pinged people quite regularly begging for help and it rarely happens �01 [09:11] <LauraHale> I've not seen any evidence that by being onfrontational and abrasive that your efforts to get work done have been more productive than they would have been had you decided to work with others. �01 [09:12] <LauraHale> Ottava: Do you have evidence that being confrontational increases productivity and community support? [09:12] <Ottava> I got the opposite advice in the Steward room to just ignore Abd as a troll [09:12] <Ottava> odd [09:12] <Ottava> By the way, aren't you being confrontational? [09:12] <Ottava> I don't remember ever going to criticize any of Abd's pages, or SB Johnny's projects, or yours, or anyone's [09:13] <Ottava> If anything, I've been put on the defense �01 [09:13] <LauraHale> Ottava: I'm being confrontational because being nice to you has never really resulted in your behavior modifying. [09:13] <Ottava> Odd how someone is put on the defense, attacked from multiple people, yet was the only one doing any work [09:13] <Ottava> Just curious, what have you done for the community again? [09:13] <Ottava> You never did explain that [09:13] <Ottava> You did take a higher ground position yet haven't justified it. �01 [09:13] <LauraHale> Ottava: I'm not active on the community. [09:13] <Ottava> It is a little odd. [09:13] <Ottava> Oh really? �01 [09:13] <LauraHale> Not really. [09:13] <Ottava> Yet you are criticizing me [09:14] <Ottava> Odd [09:14] <Ottava> .... [09:14] <Ottava> Very odd �01 [09:14] <LauraHale> I see people like you and here about the politics of Wikiversity and I just don't want to get involved with that shit. [09:14] <Ottava> So, the guy doing all the work is not doing things right, and the person pointing this out hasn't jumped in to help? [09:14] <Ottava> o.O �01 [09:14] <LauraHale> Ottava: Not really. You do what makes you happy and where you can offer the greatest contribution. [09:14] <Ottava> Sounds like a formula for disaster [09:14] <Ottava> I don't do what makes me happy, and anyone doing what makes them happy is a fool. [09:14] <Ottava> There is work to be done. [09:14] <Ottava> you aren't doing it [09:14] <Ottava> Abd isn't doing it [09:14] <Ottava> SB Johnny isn't doing it [09:15] <Ottava> Thekohser isn't doing it [09:15] <Ottava> none of them are [09:15] <Ottava> the only active person who could have any say is Jtneill �03 [09:15] * Joins: Erkan___Yilmaz (~Erkan___Y@f053220066.adsl.alicedsl.de) �01 [09:15] <LauraHale> Ottava: Translation: The only person I give a shit about is myself and I really don't care about the success of Wikiversity outside the terms I set. �01 [09:15] <LauraHale> Ottava: And it sounds like Jtneill has the same issues I have: You're abrasive and rude. You could do good work but you can't get past the need to be confrontational. It hinders your effectiveness. �01 [09:16] <LauraHale> Ottava: And you've repeatedly asserted that you don't care what others think. [09:16] <Ottava> Im sorry, but you unless you do any work [09:17] <Ottava> What rights do you have? [09:17] I doubt being confrontational is the issue either, pretending there isn't an issue when you think there is doesn't solve anything either [09:17] <Ottava> Do you think you can just freeload? [09:17] <Ottava> Just sit there in the peanut gallery and dominate everything? [09:17] <Ottava> Is this a show? Are you at the movies? Do you enjoy your popcorn? �01 [09:17] <LauraHale> Ottava: I don't freeload. I'm pretty active in the wider wiki community. I just don't want to be involved in Wikiversity because of the politics of editing with folks like you. [09:18] <Ottava> Are you Statler or Waldorf? �01 [09:18] <LauraHale> Ottava: Do you think you have the right to turn people off to contributing to Wikiversity? [09:18] <Ottava> I turn people off? �01 [09:18] <LauraHale> Ottava: What's your problem? Why do you hate Wikiversity? [09:18] <Ottava> Really? �03 [09:18] * Joins: t_thanos1 (~thanos@150.140.215.111) [09:18] <Ottava> Ahaha �01 [09:18] <LauraHale> Ottava: Why can't you read what people say? [09:18] <Ottava> What people? [09:18] <Ottava> Abd? [09:18] <Ottava> I really turned him off [09:18] <Ottava> He surely left �01 [09:19] <LauraHale> Ottava: You're really convincing me that I should be involved with Wikiversity! �01 [09:19] <LauraHale> Congrats. A+ work. [09:19] <Ottava> People left because when SB Johnny had a chance, he poisoned the atmosphere and drew them to his own competitive project [09:19] <Ottava> Laura, I don't care if you are involved or not [09:19] <Ottava> You don't do anything now �01 [09:19] <LauraHale> Ottava: Well, there you go. [09:19] <Ottava> So it isn't a loss if you continue to do anything �03 [09:19] * Joins: privatemusings (~chatzilla@unaffiliated/privatemusings) [09:20] <Ottava> continue to not do anything* �01 [09:20] <LauraHale> Ottava: Thanks for saying "Wikiversity doesn't need to grow." [09:20] <Ottava> Now look at privatemusings. I bent over backwards to protect him, even from himself [09:20] <SB_Johnny> g'day privatemusings :-) �01 [09:20] <LauraHale> Let me read that like Ottava does! [09:20] <Ottava> SB Johnny only put him in a bad position �01 [09:20] <LauraHale> "I'm Ottava! I want to destroy Wikiversity! I want to make sure we don't get any new contributors! MWA HA HA HA!" �01 [09:20] <LauraHale> Ottava: Yeah, do on about SB_Johnny and all you want. [09:21] <Ottava> LauraHale - I've introduced many people to Wikiversity over the years [09:21] G'day SB :-) [09:21] <Ottava> and I haven't chased anyone off [09:21] <Ottava> JWS did �01 [09:21] <LauraHale> That's not particularly relevant to the discussion. The discussion here involves your actions. [09:21] <Ottava> SB Johnny did [09:21] <Ottava> etc [09:21] <SB_Johnny> !time [09:21] Los Angeles 02:21 | New York 05:21 | London 10:21 | Berlin 11:21 || Tokyo 07:21 | Sydney 09:21 [09:21] less of the bending over for me, Ottava ;-) [09:21] <Ottava> You haven't pointed out any specific actions :) [09:21] theres a million ways to read what somebody says, getting it right has a 99.999% error rate [09:21] It's not generally approved (hee hee!) [09:21] <Ottava> Still asked, still not answered :) �06 [09:21] * privatemusings is brewing his morning office cuppa �01 [09:21] <LauraHale> Ottava: I repeatedly cited how you misrepresented people's words. [09:21] <Ottava> darkcode - are you saying you are 99.999% wrong? :P [09:21] <SB_Johnny> yeah, that's why I asked for the time �06 [09:21] * Ottava gives privatemusings a muffin :D [09:22] thanks for muffin. �01 [09:22] <LauraHale> And you're pretty confrontational. You don't appear to want to fix it. [09:22] (geddit) �01 [09:22] <LauraHale> You don't care how people view you. �06 [09:22] * SB_Johnny is not having coffee [09:22] <Ottava> I care how privatemusings views me [09:22] possibly Ottava ;p [09:22] be careful what you wish for........ �02 [09:22] * Quits: t_thanos (~thanos@wikiversity/assassingr�) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds�) [09:22] <Ottava> haha [09:22] at least I'm right 0.001% of the time �01 [09:22] <LauraHale> So I've given plenty of examples in IRC of your actions in IRC. And you just ignore them because they disrupt your narrative of I AM OTTAVA AND I AM GREAT! OTHERS HAVE THE PROBLEM. [09:23] <Ottava> Lets see, who else do I care about their opinion - for some reason, still Moulton, I care about Jtneill, about Mikeu, Sj, um um [09:23] <Ottava> hmm [09:23] <Ottava> Cormaggio [09:23] <Ottava> I miss him �01 [09:23] <LauraHale> And if that isn't the case, then you're not helping solve the problem of why there are pages like http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Ottava_Rima and why they want to strip you of your powers. �02 [09:23] * Quits: t_thanos1 (~thanos@150.140.215.111�) (Client Quit�) �03 [09:23] * Joins: t_thanos (~thanos@wikiversity/assassingr) [09:23] <Ottava> The only posters to that whose opinions matter are Adambro and Jtneill [09:23] <Ottava> and they haven't responded to what I've showed them yet [09:23] <Ottava> so the issue is still out [09:24] <Ottava> Oh, I care about Cary Bass but he is gone [09:24] <Ottava> I care about Jimbo, but I lurve Jimbo <3 �01 [09:24] <LauraHale> Ottava: Do you care about the health and growth of Wikiversity? [09:24] <Ottava> Did I mention Erkan [09:24] <Ottava> ? �01 [09:24] <LauraHale> Do you care about its credibility in the greater wiki community? [09:24] <Ottava> Erkan, sorry if I didn't :D [09:25] <Ottava> Well, it would be why, in the past two months I revealed over 500 copyrighted infringing pages [09:25] <Ottava> o.O [09:25] <Ottava> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/Banglapedia_(source) �01 [09:25] <LauraHale> Ottava: Great and awesome. [09:25] <Ottava> That was pretty fun [09:25] <Ottava> past 3 months [09:25] <Ottava> or whatever [09:25] <Ottava> time flies �01 [09:25] <LauraHale> Ottava: Then why do you take actions that run counter to that if it is something you care about? [09:26] <Ottava> Because I am a West Virginian redneck [09:26] <Ottava> Abuse is how I show my love [09:26] because he doesn't see it as being counter? �01 [09:26] <LauraHale> Ottava: Are you going to block me when I post a log of this to my user page on Wikiversity? [09:26] <Ottava> You have a user page on Wikiversity? [09:26] <Ottava> ooooo �01 [09:26] <LauraHale> darkcode: That's part of the problem. And why I'm trudging through this conversation. [09:26] <Ottava> I'm going to look [09:27] <Ottava> SB Johnny flipped it over to logged discussion so �01 [09:27] <LauraHale> In order to help him understand that other persepctive existed. [09:27] <Ottava> http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:LauraHale [09:27] <Ottava> Kinda fancy �01 [09:27] <LauraHale> Ottava: I'm correct in assuming you're not going to block me? [09:27] <Ottava> Mine looks like shit in comparison [09:27] <Ottava> Laura, I like the name Laura, so I wouldn't block you ^__^ [09:28] <SB_Johnny> well, I was hoping that making the logs ok you would think a bit before "speaking" �01 [09:28] <LauraHale> On that note, I'm going to post it and then I have things to do. [09:28] <Ottava> "I've been in fandom since 1994 or so. I started with Star Trek: The Next Generation and moved on to Sailor Moon and then Babylon 5 and X-Files." [09:28] <Ottava> :D [09:28] is the aim to do a bit of an IRC version of the community review thing here at this time? [09:28] <SB_Johnny> but that's obviously a failed experiment :-) [09:28] <Ottava> You should totally write a learning project about scifi stuff [09:28] technically SB_Johnny removed the no public logging, I added the discussions may be logged for public use [09:28] <Ottava> privatemusings - it was my aim but Laura was uncooperative :( �06 [09:28] * privatemusings thinks open logs are good for everyone anyhow.... [09:29] what were you trying to understand, ottava? [09:29] (or what were you trying to get from it?) [09:29] <SB_Johnny> ah, wife and daughter have arrived at last! bbl [09:29] ta ta SB..... [09:30] since I thought it only fair that people should be warned about the possibility of being logged Session Close: Tue Nov 23 09:30:56 2010


text:
User talk:Stanltaaf

 Hello Stanltaaf, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. Jtneill - Talk - c 06:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

 Hi! My name is WikiversityJack. I am a pumpkin and a Wikiversity mascot. My aunt told me that fun + learning = Wikiversity. Let me know if I can help you out.

title: User talk:Stanltaaf


text:
University of Canberra/RCC2011

RecentChangesCamp2011 was an OpenSpace unconference focused on wikis and online collaborative practices. RCC2011 was organised by University of Canberra staff in National Institute of Sport Studies (UCNISS), following the success of the RCC2010 event, and RecentChangesCamps held in other parts of the world. The main characteristics of the event were that it was free to attend, open to anyone, with a program determined on the day by the participants. The aim of the event was to draw together people interested in worldwide iterative knowledge involvement or wikis, to discuss and share knowledge, and eat and socialise in a friendly face to face setting.

Sessions
Sessions at RecentChangesCamp were proposed by the participants on the day and in the lead up to the event. The agenda was set up on the first day morning and was in constant flux as sessions were newly proposed or merged. Read more about this open space process. Participants did their best to record and document their sessions, some kept MeetingWords, others recorded video and audio, many took photos.

'Below is a list of sessions that were proposed prior to the event. We are currently gathering all documentation, and sub pages for sessions that actually did take place, so expect many more changes to the list below. We're aiming to complete this work by 5 February 2011.'

Pre conference events

 * 1) /Discussion About Open Space/. 12 noon in Building 1, level B, Teaching Commons. Recording on Ustream failed to transfer audio.
 * 2) Lunch at Jamison Shopping Centre Peruvian Chicken.
 * 3) Dinner at the Light House.

Friday January 28th

 * 1) Open Space Agenda Building
 * 2) Build your own lunch. Ingredients for sandwich lunch was provided, we all had a little picnic in the Commons
 * 3) /WikiCulture/
 * 4) Wikis for education
 * 5) /Printing books out of wikis/
 * 6) /All about Appropedia/
 * 7) /When will wikis supersede traditional Word Processing?/
 * 8) /Wikisource/
 * 9) /Wikis for fun/
 * 10) Dinner at the Chiang Rai Restaurant Belconnen

Saturday January 29th

 * 1) /What key facilitation capacities help create successful wikis?/

 * 1) /Let's reverse-brainstorm: Why wikis don't work/
 * 2) /The future of the Vocational Education and Training sector/
 * 3) /Open Educational Resources/
 * 4) /All about Wikitravel/
 * 5) /Wikiversity for postgraduate education/
 * 1) Gourmet pizza lunch from Crust Pizza Belconnen
 * 2) BBQ Sunset Dinner by Lake Ginninderra

Sunday January 30th

 * 1) Lunch from the Peruvian Restaurant at the Jamison Centre
 * 2) /Wikimedia Australia session/
 * 3) /The Bruce Declaration/
 * 4) /Advanced Wiki Skills including Bots/
 * 5) /Going forward: Future wiki conferences/

Post conference event
/RecentChangesCamp Expanded/ in San Francisco, California, United States, part of MarkDilley's travel grant by Wikimedia Australia was to 'download' the work from RCC Canberra to wiki folk in SF - hopefully Wikimedia folks will be part of that.

Recordings

 * 2011 RCC in Canberra was originally organised on the RecentChangesCamp.org wiki
 * Intro and Questions for RecentChangesCamp 2011 Canberra, Kirsty Sharp
 * Twitter #rcc11
 * Net Traveller blog
 * Laura's Youtube videos
 * Leigh's photos on Flickr
 * Michael Coghlan's blog post and his pre-conference Thoughts About Open Space and Unconference Approaches
 * Michael's photos on Flickr

If you have media to share, by all means place it on your preferred media sharing site and drop the link above, but ultimately it is most helpful if you could load it to the Wikimedia Commons with the categories: University of Canberra/RCC and RecentChangesCamp 2011, Canberra.

Sponsors
We would like to thank our sponsors:

 * University of Canberra: Providing the venue space
 * National Institute of Sport Studies: Staffing and catering
 * AboutUs: Facilitator MarkDilley
 * Wikimedia Australia: Flights and accommodation grants

Without them, we could not hold this event. Their support means a lot to us!

What people have said

 * Past events
 * 2010, Canberra, Australia
 * 2010, Montreal, Quebec
 * 2009, Portland, Oregon
 * Pictures on Flickr tagged rcc09

 * 2008, Palo Alto, California
 * Wikimedia Commons category of images

 * 2007, Montréal, Quebec (aka RoCoCo)
 * Video from RoCoCo

 * 2007, Portland, Oregon
 * 2006, Portland, Oregon
 * http://recentchangescamp.org/

RCC events bring together people for a common purpose: discussing the past, present, and future of the technology and collaborative method that is wiki. RCC is a chance for everyone in the wiki community, to meet and have a fun, and have productive conversation about our passion for wikis of all stripes.
 * What is Recent Changes Camp, anyway?

At RCC, everybody is welcomed. You don't need to be an expert on anything, and you certainly don't need to consider yourself a geek. Collaboration thrives on diversity! All you need to bring is an open mind, and a willingness to participate, whether by teaching or by taking an active role in discussions. And, don't forget, an unconference is what we make it, so let's make it enlightening and fun.

 * Sessions covering an array of interests

 * Cross-Cultural Collaboration (RoCoCo, 2007 Montréal)
 * Throwing and Catching Swords - Hypersensory Awareness for Better Community (2007 Portland)
 * The Evolutionary Edge of Software Development (2006 Portland)
 * Using wikis for government processes (2008 Palo Alto)
 * Wine tasting (2008 Palo Alto)
 * Nonlinear conversations from the Glass Plate Game (2006 Portland)
 * Who edits Wikipedia? By Ed Chi of PARC's Augmented Social Cognition research group

 * Remember that the schedule will be set during the opening circle.

title: University of Canberra/RCC2011


text:
User talk:Frannyg

 Hello Frannyg, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Mu301Bot 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need help. --mikeu talk 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Frannyg


text:
User talk:Nardaviel

 Hello Nardaviel, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Mu301Bot 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need help. --mikeu talk 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nardaviel


text:
User talk:STG.MGR.USA

 Hello STG.MGR.USA, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Mu301Bot 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need help. --mikeu talk 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:STG.MGR.USA


text:
User talk:Swordsel

 Hello Swordsel, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Mu301Bot 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need help. --mikeu talk 08:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Swordsel


text:
User talk:Rakhangi

 Hello Rakhangi, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! If you're a twitter user, please follow http://twitter.com/Wikiversity. --Draicone (talk) 10:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rakhangi