Everybody’s reaction to Wikipedia has gotten warmer over time, as Wikipedia’s earned credibility Options

[thekohser]

Sue Gardner is kicking her fanaticism into high gear.

[Moulton]

Barry Kort

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

August 9, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Sue, I can see from the serial numbers of the comments that you have released 11 of 45* comments here.

For the benefit of those respondents who are perplexed as to your criteria for selecting which comments to release from moderation, would you be kind enough to outline your criteria?

* Upon posting, I find the serial number has increased by 4, so Sue had actually released 11 of 49 comments (excluding the 2 of her own).

[Jon Awbrey]

Barry Kort

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

August 9, 2010 at 3:28 PM

Sue, I can see from the serial numbers of the comments that you have released 11 of 45* comments here.

For the benefit of those respondents who are perplexed as to your criteria for selecting which comments to release from moderation, would you be kind enough to outline your criteria?

* Upon posting, I find the serial number has increased by 4, so Sue had actually released 11 of 49 comments (excluding the 2 of her own).

Silly Rabbit, it's “the blog where anyone can comment”.

Jon Awbrey says:
(Your comment is awaiting moderation.)
August 9, 2010 at 6:30 PM

Not to worry, Barry, they’re working on an oversight button as we speak.

Well, as some of us speak.

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[Jon Awbrey]

Responding to some BS by Sage …

And some ranker BS by Sue Gardner …

“I approve the majority”

20 out of 85 is a WP:MAJORITY.

Jon Awbrey
(Your comment is awaiting moderation.)
August 18, 2010 at 11:45 AM

That’s okay, we’re starting a special subforum at The Wikipedia Review dedicated to the blog posts by our members that are WP:CENSORED here.

[Moulton]

20 out of 85 is a WP:MAJORITY.

In the interest of Fairness in Statistics, please note that the scope of the serial numbers is the whole blog site since its inception; they do not reset for each new post. So over the scope of her blog, Sue has released 66 of 85 posts, which (according to my math) is a 78% supermajority.

Sue writes:

I approve everything that I think adds value to the discussion. In general, I think about the signal-to-noise ratio: I want to create a space that’s conducive to thoughtful conversation :-)

I have to agree with Sue that some of the posts that did not pass muster were plausibly rejected because they did not exemplify thoughtful additions to the conversation.

[Jon Awbrey]

20 out of 85 is a WP:MAJORITY.

In the interest of Fairness in Statistics, please note that the scope of the serial numbers is the whole blog site since its inception; they do not reset for each new post. So over the scope of her blog, Sue has released 66 of 85 posts, which (according to my math) is a 78% supermajority.

IDNKT, but thanks for the info.

Are you counting her own posts in the supermajority?

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)