WiserEarth Editors
Collaboration in serving the greater WiserEarth community
As active community members, we would like to make this group into a gathering point where we can work together to transform WiserEarth.org into an effective platform of support for the global community of concerned citizens and organizations who are working to create a more just and sustainable world. ...learn more
GROUP DETAILS
Created: Nov 20, 2007
Updated: Nov 22, 2009
Membership: Invitation Only
Semi-Private
Topic: editorial policy - creating transparency and accountability
Posts (1 - 20 of 20)
Sort by: Ascending | Descending
Login to Post a Reply.
|
|
this is the link again to the Indymedia editorial policy which Sheri provided: http://montreal.indymedia.org/twiki/bin/view/Ontario/WebEditorialPolicy
Indymedia will "hide" postings that: * have been requested hidden by the poster * have been posted by someone who is found to be impersonating someone else * have been posted by someone who claims a false affiliation with an organization * are duplicates * have no content other than advertising a business or another web site * in the opinion of the collective, directly or indirectly (via web link) incite hatred against an oppressed group of people * in the opinion of the collective, directly or indirectly (via web link) constitute an explicit or implied physical threat against any individual or group of people * in the opinion of the collective, contains unsubstantiated and very damaging information about an individual or group (such as false event info) * are garbage (e.g. pictures submitted as text) * are relevant mainly to a jurisdiction outside Ontario (e.g. Radio Georgia's 25th anniversary). These posts should go to another IMC, or to the Global page. * are comments that are unrelated to the article being commented on. * are organizing specific illegal acts (i.e. saying to meet at a certain place and time to go do something illegal.) I agree with all of the criteria for hiding postings... With a little tweaking on some points, it'll be exactly what WE needs. I have created a draft page for the Editorial Policy here: http://wiserearth.org/article/2f53411279c010564f45c155176f5520/new/1/group/WiserEarthEditors My only issue, is explaining in every case why a comment was removed. Since WE has a "view all comments" page, it can be a pain to view the editor's explanations throughout the site for spam or accidental posts. At the very least though, there is a notification that a comment was removed. I think that for now, this is sufficient. Returning to this point from Sheri, "if you are doing to start a discussion around rights of all wiserearthlings, how do you propose going about that? to be inclusive? in the survey was there any question that hinted around this topic? i see it as there being some fundamental core "rights" and responsibilities (are you linking them?) and then there is a clear process for addressing the evolution of the system itself...so it's not stuck in stone. WE is a living system. what are the guiding principles of living systems (a question i ask myself alot...)." --- I think that writing the fundamental "rights" of all WiserEarth users will be an interesting and exciting process, and will need the right set of procedures to create a document that is representative and inclusive of as much of WiserEarth as possible. Please review the Global Assembly Dialog's method for decision-making, which I think would be a very appropriate way for WiserEarth users to collaborate on this: http://wiserearth.org/article/4a08bc182afcc2d56f5ecbca1e858c5c In a nutshell (taken from the pg), 1) The basic idea is that we can elect messages to represent us. This would be online, of course. So why not apply the method globally? It is not all that hard to create an online Voice of Humanity with hundreds of millions of participants voting to elect messages that represent everyone. 2) The second idea is to structure this voting on messages into a dialog that alternates between "unity" and "diversity" rounds. In the unity rounds everyone together elects a message to represent our common humanity, and in the diversity rounds we break out into groups, each of which elects its own message. This structure co-opts the hard-liners. |
|
|
Yes let's keep in mind the editorial policy.
david:"Therefore, being able to move comments is valuable, to reflect some manageable train of thought in topics, and also to aid others in 'maintaining the train' themselves. Is this something that has been discussed, and if so, has some result occurred?" -This can be listed in the Suggestions group. Not personally sure about its priority at the moment though. It also might be confusing for the original commenter if they find their comment moved. It'd be cool to copy and paste comments from other forums though while also capturing the user's avatar and the time of the comment. |
|
|
By the way, we still need to continue discussing about the editorial policy that Sheri started. Maybe the result can be collected into a draft document. Still not sure how we can get it adopted as an official WiserEarth policy though.
|
|
|
Hey all,
*** ON EMERGERGENCE, LIVING SYSTEMS, AND APPLICATION TO WISEREARTH*** Sheri, I would love to learn more about living systems and emergence. Please do send me those links and resources. Or if you and John are willing, open it up here for all to see and elaborate upon. I've only been introduced with "emergence" and "learning from living systems" the past year, beginning with an article by Donella H. Meadows, then moving on to Elisabet Sahtouri's work (via David C. Korten's The Post-Corporate World), and recently Paul's Blessed Unrest. Your link on Meg Wheatley's work is an essential complement and integrator of David Braden's Three Dimensional Networking and June Holley's Network Weaving, which I will treasure and ponder upon for years to come. All in all, I'm still pretty much new to emergence and living systems. I'm very much interested in them, and I think, other WiserEarthlings will too, once they discover the wisdom and potential in learning from and about them. WiserEarth, the community, and beyond, will tremendously benefit if workable learnings from these can be implemented. And please do feel free to start discussions around the other important questions you've mentioned before. *** ON CHANGING TITLE OF DISCUSSION *** Not a supported feature yet. So, no change is possible. *** ON SHIFTING AND BRANCHING OUT DISCUSSIONS *** Here's how I did it: 1. The person who will shift and branch out the thread into respective topics, must be familiar with the flows and criss-crossing of each topic. 2. Identify each topic and related comments (or part of comments) 3. Arrange, or copy-paste, the comments in a chronological order and put the name of user who wrote the comment for each. 4. Think of a suitable title for each topic (train of comments) and create new threads using the titles. 5. Copy-paste comments arranged in step 3 into respective new threads, and explain at the first sentence that this thread and the subsequent comments have been shifted from the origional thread (put the title and link to the origional thread). 6. Put a "stoppage and diversion" comment in the origional thread (of step 1), that says something like: "This thread has been branched out into the following threads (list the threads title with links), please continue the discussions on these threads" So, it's pretty much manual work, which is a must to achieve clarity within the current capabilities of the discussion section of groups. An example in the "Improving This Group" discussion @ http://www.wiserearth.org/forum/view/2dfe0105f5c2c3e1011a8118b342f3ff/group/WiserEarthEditors Scroll down two or three times, and you will see step 6 above. For an example of step 5, see the first post of "(SETUP) Roles and Responsibilities of Editorsand Administrators" @ http://www.wiserearth.org/comment/the_masterid/8c0b3b1df27f0f54a90a9b5609d0115c/master_type/forum/page/2 To David on "maintaining the train": I'm not aware of specific discussion around this issue. Maybe you can start a new one? *** ON WISEREARTH AS A SEMANTIC WEB *** This excellent suggestion by James also deserves a separate thread for optimum clarity and discussion. *** ON PUNCTUATIONS AND WORD CHOICE*** Yep, as a non-native speaker of english, I sometimes was taken by surprise at how people defy conventional grammar and convention of English, and uses slangs which people like me can not understand (I've met with "bomb" for "boring", "bonkers" for a meaning I'm not aware of yet, and surely others to come). Just a reminder to care for the needs of the global community in regards to writing style (especially in English as the de facto global languange). *** A TIP FOR SHERI TO PREVENT UNWANTED COMMENT DELETION *** I now use a separate text editor to write long comments because it is difficult to scroll up and down within the small confine of the "Post comment" box. You can also save the comment in case your PC hangs or some other misfortunes occur. (and, if you're using Windows, have you tried "Ctrl+Z" to undo the deletion of your comment? This works OK for me in a number of accidents). By the way, I've suggested that the comment box be made lengthier to at least twice the current length (in the Suggestions forum), so user won't have to repetitively scroll up and down to refer to parts of the comment. |
|
Bowo's Comment on Punctuation
Hey, all: A comment Bowo made below was an Ah-Hah! moment for me (thanks, Bowo) regarding conventions in punctuation. Our [USA] insular American existence is seldom troubled by having to translate and interpret foreign language, so we perhaps do not grasp the value of convention in our writing. I have commented before about the desire to be global, but the behavior of being parochial and therefore isolated. WE have to avoid the latter to achieve the former. Otherwise, there will be fewer people, whose first language is not English, who will be attracted to our efforts to improve civil society and reach sustainability. WE all could be worse for it. David Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun! |
|
|
Suggestions for Improvements and Re-organization, and Getting off Topic
Hey, all: This is an interesting wide-ranging discussion, qualified to have several individual threads. Sheri, I like the idea of adding titles to individual comments, hence my own. Of course, [ahem] I like mature punctuation, too, but that is for others to consider. One topic in the general Discussion Forums was originally about why "Gender Equity" was not also under "Men" in the AoFs. But, as is often the case it changed, but James Riley brought a very intriguing idea to make the site much more interactive, by using extended connections between items to increase the flow of information. This idea uses the premises established in the database, such as 2 organizations in the same area addressing the same issue--and syllogisms, such as here, being that those 2 organizations should work together. As it is, the site is rather passive, with the only interactive features being the Watchlist and Message Alerts (uh, are there more?). But as we pointed out in that discussion, there are limitless opportunities to expand this function of the site, but it would add ( I think) immeasurably to our ("our" being the possessive form of WE) effectiveness. In Evolutionary Biology there is a term "Punctuated Equilibrium" which describes the eruption of new life forms and rapid speciation and adaptive radiation following a cataclysmic event. There is a genetic pool of variation which just explodes when given the chance. I feel We could do the same and transform ourselves and the movement, and make tremendous progress toward our goal of sustainable human existence. That discussion could easily have built on a reference to an evolving site, as suggested below with the "mycelium" reference. (By the way, "mycelium" is such an obscure reference that it took me by surprise, and even my very good, extensive spell-checker 'burped' on it.) My point here is that WE tend to really get off-topic. Therefore, being able to move comments is valuable, to reflect some manageable train of thought in topics, and also to aid others in 'maintaining the train' themselves. Is this something that has been discussed, and if so, has some result occurred? David Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun! |
|
how can i as an editor change the topic i've created? i don't seem to have that ability?
|
|
|
what's the easy process for shifting a conversation to a different forum topic? bowo, you've named a few of those and i'm assuming you might have a good way to do it.
|
|
|
ps: i left this link out:
support the evolution of networks (see Lifecycle of Emergence: Using Emergence to Take Social Innovation to Scale: http://www.berkana.org/articles/lifecycle.htm) alot of wisdom here and the HOW is still unclear but this feature of emergence is also one in living systems and how we DESIGN for emergence is critical. meg wheatley has some great ideas here that have been incubated within the berkana ecosystem that is global-local, or what they call trans-local. |
|
|
(eek, i just had a bug with my post here: i scrolled up after spending 10 minutes writing and then went to clarify something bowo had written and came up, decided to delete a long phrase and voila, the whole comment disappeared...sad)...
ps - i'd love to see titles for comments :) okay, 2 quick comments: 1. bowo, we're in complete agreement about using caps for title bars. will do! you've given me renewed food for thought on this and thanks for liberating me so i can still write fast. it would be a shift for me. although perhaps i need to slow down more and write from the grounded place within. 2. i'm delighted that you are interested in this question of how these principles can be translated to WE....on all the levels you mention. precisely! paul's chapter on restoration is a great place to start. i love what he brings out there and would appreciate the exploration around the potential application to WE. i also have some notes on that with regard to this very topic that I can share via email. This is a passion of mine and within wisermexico, we're working in this realm in terms of how we weave together social technologies and architectures of engagement and digital technologies for increasing collaboration, CI and support the evolution of networks (see This is early stages but it’s been an ongoing conversation for years and we’re getting closer to having spaces and technologies to move on it. Obviously anything we do in WM will be directly affecting WE. This feels like another thread. Bowo, I can share with you a lot of information and resources on this. And John Coates and I have been in this conversation already privately. We could open it up. Also Elisabet sahtouris’ work is a great resource: http://www.ratical.org/LifeWeb/Articles/LSinetHF.html. This paper entitled Living Systems, the Internet, and Human Future is a seminal piece. She really is breaking some new ground here. I heard her speak at the Planetwork conference in SF in May 2000 and she was profound. There’s a section in this paper on essential features for healthy systems. We want to save nature, but maybe by seeing into nature more closely, we’ll discover more ways to save ourselves. quote of the day: “are we witnessing the mycelium of our networks becoming visible and transforming into viable structures for action?” |
|
|
Oh yes, another important topic, deserving of a dedicated thread, was what Sheri said:
"WE is a living system. what are the guiding principles of living systems?" And I would add, "How does these principles can best be translated to WiserEarth's design, features, governance, policies, and interactions?" The last chapter of Paul's Blessed Unrest on Restoration mentioned these principles, and would be a good start for this discussion I believe. |
|
|
Hi Sheri :D yeah... it was a bit awkward for me too to comment on such a trivial detail :P
I was only speaking from standard linguistic term (read: convention), where for the beginning of a new sentence, a capital letter is the norm. I'm guessing it's a global standard too, at least for languages that uses alphabets and for people who attend conventional type of schooling of course. And I figured that if we intend to go global with WiserEarth, why trouble our selves with unconventional (though convenient) way in writing sentences? As for my assumption about the possible reason you had of not using capital letters was maybe you're among those who don't like to use capital letters from a philosophical point of view. I've seen one or two people who refuse to use capital "i" to avoid the emphases on the self, on me, on myself.. etc., because they think it is a sign of egoism, or a form of "mental" separation from the rest of life. Thus, by employing a small "i", they feel more a part of the greater life and world, and more selfless. So, I extended this assumption for you not employing any capital letters at all... to really avoid the emphasis on the self and to imply a "soft" tone into your writing. Just a guess though... seems like not a lucky one this time :P So, if the reason was to type faster and maintain a smooth flow of ideas and thoughts... then by all means carry on Sheri, I'm more eager to hear your wonderful thoughts and ideas than commenting on your preferred style of writing :) (Except for the first letter of the title that is... hehe... just can't let go of this one yet :P ) And I don't mind at all even if the reason was "philosophical", just please try not to do it on the title... please? :D hehe... So, looking forward to hear more of your great comments :) |
|
|
quick comment re capital letter convention for topic titles:
i had to smile bowo when i read this. i am happy to follow this convention. i have no reason except it's how i write all my emails and my correspondence these days except for more formal writing. i've been doing this for years. i could probably come up with a reason but i am not sure it would be valid. one thing, it does saves time and i can type fast and like to flow with my words sometimes (not always ideal for certain forums). since you are the first person to actually formally request me to do something different within a social networking space (i don't think i'm the only person in WE who does this and i know there were people in omidyar who write like me but maybe the topic titles is different). can you tell me why you feel it's important that we have this convention? just honestly curious :) (i'll respond to other comments once i've read them more carefully) so no good answers, but happy to use the |
|
|
Oh yes, forgot to add a link to a discussion regarding the WiserEarth Content Standard titled "Should selected for-profit businesses working on social and environmental issues be included on WiserEarth?" @
http://www.wiserearth.org/forum/view/9775e0601b61f9ecbe146df704e77beb |
|
|
Wonderful thread!
There's so many important issues raised here. Thanks for starting this Sheri. I'll try to give my 2 cents for each: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ***ON EDITORIAL POLICY AND GUIDING THE EVOLUTION OF WISEREARTH*** To my knowledge, we already have principles and basic policy for this: 1. WiserEarth Principles @ http://www.wiserearth.org/article/ebae1d9f4f61d194ff3ee0e74f0ce929 2. WiserEarth Content Standards @ http://www.wiserearth.org/article/Methodology 3. WiserEarth Community Guidelines @ http://www.wiserearth.org/index.php//article/e6d1e607f6e29b9f3bf253d61edd9c92/ When Michael deletes a comment, I believe he is trying to act in the best interest of WiserEarht and all WiserEarthlings based on these principles, standards and guidelines. An example from the Community Guidelines: Be Polite and Civil Remember that the WiserEarth community consists of people from all over the world with different native languages and varying degrees of technical knowledge. Please be polite and civil with other people and assume good faith at all times. So when a user is posting a comment defying this guideline, an editor can "Flag for Review" that comment. It will then be visible to other editors who can then "Suppress" that comment, so it will than be marked with "Deleted by an editor". So it's not quite a direct delete process. Another example from the Content Standards: Organizations that do not qualify for inclusion: For-profit Companies / Corporations / Organizations So when an editor spotted a user adding a for-profit organization, he/she can mark that organizations as "Removed by an editor" (I'm not sure this is the exact wordings, but more or less so). Of course, all things are amendable to change, so these principles, standards and guidelines are open to change, hopefully for the better of course. Any user can simply do so by opening up a discussion thread like this one in the main discussion forums. Any editor however, have the privilege to edit these "Protected" pages and can perform edits directly without the consent of the community, which is something that we'd like to reconsider by starting the "Roles and Responsibilities of Editors and Administrators" thread to prevent abuse of this privilege by editors. As to inclusivity and community deliberation and decision making, to my knowledge, the only available tool at the moment are discussions. I read about a feature that has yet to be implemented to address this issue called "Democratization" @ http://www.wiserearth.org/article/359a936df45c655b8cd1c6d5bb0fffa8 From that page: "Since WiserEarth is a community-driven site, this page has been established to direct the democratization of decision-making on WiserEarth which includes: functions, capabilities and structure." Maybe this will relate to what Sheri mentioned as "a clear process for addressing the evolution of the system itself...so it's not stuck in stone" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ***ON DISCUSSION SNAPSHOTS*** About a week ago I put this suggestion in the Suggestion forum to have a short explanation box under the title of each discussion so newcomers or returning participant can have an idea about how the discussion started and evolved. Please have a look "Adding a Short Description Space Under Discussion Title" @ http://www.wiserearth.org/forum/view/843d18235a1286cedb42eb3ae03fa292 Hope you can improve it further, or come up with a much better solution Sheri. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ***ON RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF USERS*** This is an excellent idea. We need to explore this in a separate thread I guess. Criss-crossing between topics in a thread is very confusing. This group has had an experince in this with our "Improving This Group" thread, which are now branched out as "(SETUP)" discussions. By the way, since being an editor I'm unable to check whether users can "Flag for Review" a comment... can they? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ***ON THREE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS*** - If WE is a culture, how is it different than some of the stuck patterns we currently live in? - Why would people want to come back to wiser and make it their second home for making a difference in the world - How do we create a space that allows for wise collective action as one of the outcomes? These questions, adequately answered, will help define WiserEarth's identity and guide it's evolution. (not sure whether the word "guided" and "evolution" can exist side by side though...but co-intelligence must count somewhere in the evolution of WiserEarth) And these will surely need at least one - and more probably three - separate threads which this group would happily host and corroborate on. Feel free to start two new threads on this Sheri. (By the way, I'm sure you have your reasons to not use capital letters... but the convention is still using capital letters for title of an entity... so, would you mind to use at least one capital letter, that is, for the first letter of the discussion title? or maybe teach us something about your reasons for not using em :) Thank you for your kind consideration) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ***ON ELEGANCE AND SIMPLICITY*** This also deserve a separate thread. To design WiserEarth's interface, features and tools to enable barrier-free participation in the community. We have to keep in mind though, like a hammer, a bicycle, and any other tool, to use WiserEarth in the best possible way, some effort to learn and practice will still be needed. We just have to make the learning curve to be smooth. To address a part of this issue, a thread on "Streamlining WiserEarth-Related Pages" have been started @ http://www.wiserearth.org/forum/view/3fceded53ed06871adae2dc477c49398/group/WiserEarthEditors And I've seen some comments on the "redesign of WiserEarth" somewhere... maybe we can start a thread on "Redesigning WiserEarth for Elegance and Simplicity"? |
|
|
thanks camilla and michael for the responses.
your attentiveness and responsiveness is to me an indication of one of the hearts of wiser right now, that there is a committed group of people nourishing and nurturing the soil of questions, conversations, requests. to me this is one of the features for successfully and artfully "hosting" an online space. john coates and i have been musing around this topic and it's so juicy. what do we know in our onlife world that we can carry over into the online world. why would people want to come back to wiser and make it their second home for making a difference in the world...but wait that's for another forum, i'll focus :) thanks michael about the tracking tip, i do know how to do that and i actually did NOT know i could do it through the little eye on the right side. cool. i think making sure there are multiple places for accessing features/tools is helpful. and that there's a pattern people can follow. the quick snapshot of threads....that is my way of getting at how we can easily see what conversations are happening so we can (1) follow (2) jump in easily (3) create meaning that can be shared... along this line, john just wrote me: "Maybe what WE needs is a variety of ways for groups to converse, and esp to show things so we can see and hear to help illustrate points. and Wise collective action - that's really got to be the goal with this thing." to me this is the heart of what i'm interested in and it's not so much editorial policy but it is one of the hearts of WE. how do we create a space that allows for wise collective action as one of the outcomes? regarding hiding/trash can/transparency, yeah to all you've said. thanks for really looking at this. i believe that if transparency is one of the fundamental values of WE, then we must be mindfully looking at how easily we slip into old patterns of lack of transparency. i see it everywhere in our world and it is also an indicator of a lack of trust. so thanks for being mindful here and noticing that this "right" is one for all. this will shift things. small things shift creating opening for bigger shifts. if WE is a culture, how is it different than some of the stuck patterns we currently live in? i think there is something fascinating about why second life is booming.... let me know if you want any help tracking down some other editorial policies. it's been a few years since i was immersed in indymedia and things have changed, but really good work was done around some of these questions and living up to some pretty high principles and ideals in the design and architecture (of course lots of failures and stumblings along the way :) thanks for the distinctions around selection of editors and comments. distinctions are always good :) you are doing great work. thanks michael and camilla (and everyone else of course!)... if you are doing to start a discussion around rights of all wiserearthlings, how do you propose going about that? to be inclusive? in the survey was there any question that hinted around this topic? i see it as there being some fundamental core "rights" and responsibilities (are you linking them?) and then there is a clear process for addressing the evolution of the system itself...so it's not stuck in stone. WE is a living system. what are the guiding principles of living systems (a question i ask myself alot...). elegance and simplicity are two fundamental design principles i love. even with the complexity of a beautiful growing organism like wiserearth, feeling that elegance and simplicity helps people join...designing for the simplicity on the other side of complexity is a great design challenge. i see it happening here and all over these conversations. michael, i'll continue to think about the snapshot of the threads idea and brainstorm a bit with john and share our harvest...i know this is also an interest of the wisermexico folks on this topic. |
|
|
Hi Sheri
Thanks for bringing up this topic. You can track discussions by adding it to your watchlist (click the eye on the right side...yea I know the eye doesn't scream "click me to add me to your watchlist"). I'm not sure what you mean by getting a quick snapshot of the threads, but there definitely are little features we can add to make our discussion forums more friendly...such as having a topic displayed for each comment. Not many people, beside myself remove comments. I usually remove them because 1. spelling/grammar error 2. spam 3. completely irrelevant/incomplete/accidental post However, I understand the concerns of transparency here, and the confusion one probably has when they see "Removed by Editor" I'll definitely review Indymedia's policy, I'm glad we could learn from yours and appreciate you for sharing it! I like the trash can idea that is open to everyone, for now only editors can view deleted comments..on the same page which they were deleted from. I forgot that this is one unique ability also given to editors, but one which I see now more as a right for all rather than a privilege for some. This group as a whole was created to address questions like this. The "roles and responsibilities" topic also is discussing editorial policy...as is considered as a priority for the group as a whole to address (before we answer the question of how we select editors), but we haven't addressed how to handle comments yet. This topic would be an appropriate sub-topic of the "roles.." group, but I don't mind seeing the discussion here stray into other topics. Now that you've brought up how all users on Indymedia can view deleted comments, we should also begin a discussion on the rights of all WiserEarth users. It'll help us figure out what the privileges and rights of Editors and Administrators are. |
|
Excellent comment. To my knowledge there are no guidelines for editors to delete comments. These obviously need to be drawn up as it would help the editorial community to know how to maintain transparency. Maybe we could this forum to discuss those policies and how they should work.
|
|
|
hi,
i've been lurking a bit and appreciating everything that's happening here! the energy here is very inspiring. apologies if this may have been covered somewhere, but it's hard for me to know. in fact, is there something being worked on so that we can track the threads and see a quick snapshot of the threads and the themes and decisions? that's a separate topic i guess :) i am raising this question about "editorial policy" because i was just on a discussion page and noticed there were a number of comments deleted (one was on the topic of open sourcing the code). what's the current policy for deleting and is this stated somewhere? as a cofounder of indymedia and having spent 4 years within that media network, the issue of how do we handle open publishing which allows anything to be said with the need for respect, boundaries and a healthy community. so some of the local imcs (seattle imc was one of them) spent alot of time developing a robust editorial policy that balanced all the sides and created transparency to the process. perhaps this is not as important at this stage in wiser's evolution because it's just a small comment on one thread, but i can guarantee that this will be an issue in the future and it would be wise of wiser to really address this. what is the role and responsibility of an editor when deleting a comment? perhaps this is more relevant to a media/journalism environment, but i see a time when (news and public affairs) "stories" will be part of the wiser environment. here's one example: http://montreal.indymedia.org/twiki/bin/view/Ontario/WebEditorialPolicy it's just a template. what we also did in seattle was create a policy where everything that was deleted was not permanently deleted but rather placed in a "trash can". IF people really wanted to go through the trash can, they could. so i'm curious if this conversation is happening somewhere and if i could join that discussion. thanks for all the great work. |
You do not have access to post to this record
1 to 20 of 20 Posts
From WiserEarth Principles
@ http://www.wiserearth.org/article/ebae1d9f4f61d194ff3ee0e74f0ce929
Respect
WiserEarth honors the uniqueness of each individual and organization with respect to race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, and religious beliefs.
>>> in the opinion of the editors, show disrespect toward any individual and organization regarding race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, and religious beliefs.
From WiserEarth Community Guidelines
@ http://www.wiserearth.org/index.php//article/e6d1e607f6e29b9f3bf253d61edd9c92/
Be Polite and Civil
Remember that the WiserEarth community consists of people from all over the world with different native languages and varying degrees of technical knowledge. Please be polite and civil with other people and assume good faith at all times.
>>> in the opinion of the editors, is impolite and uncivil in nature.
Do Not Infringe Copyright
WiserEarth is a free, community-driven website based on open source software protocols which means that anyone can use or modify the content and resources included on the site. Submitting resources (beyond reference) or content which are not yours will infringe copyright and may incur legal problems. It will also limit our ability to share and redistribute content and features across the community.
>>> are infringing copyright, i.e. contains materials that is beyond the limits of the "fair use" principle.