Meetups, Kids, and Videotape, Was "Interesting Meetup"; merged with "Underaged Editor Options

[Alex]

The New York City meetup yesterday has a video available of the second part of the meetup. It's quite an interesting discussion about requests for adminship, with participants including Newyorkbrad, MBisanz, DGG and various others. Up to about 25 mins in they discuss RFAs, then it's onto the chapter.

Quite an interesting thing to watch; not only the discussion, but also how meetups work out in other places. I've been to a few meetups, but they've all taken place in a pub/restaurant, and are a lot less formal - no presentations, no meeting room etc, just casual conversation. What are other people's experiences of meetups, or thoughts on the video?

[Anonymous editor]

Looking for this?

This post has been edited by Anonymous editor:

[Cla68]

Looking for this?

Perhaps the two thread should be combined? Anyway, should Wikipedia require participants to be over 16 years old or something like that?

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[Doc glasgow]

Looking for this?

Perhaps the two thread should be combined? Anyway, should Wikipedia require participants to be over 16 years old or something like that?

I don't think age restrictions should be required for general editing. However, I do think that wikipedia often forgets that it isn't just a community, it is a very visible publisher. And publishing information has huge moral and legal implications for both the subjects and the publishers.

My own view is that no one under 18 should ever be an administrator. But perhaps more importantly, I'd prohibit minors from working on BLPs. I've personally taken the decision never to create or add significant information to a BLP, and particularly if it is information that I suspect the subject might not like, because there's always the danger of litigation or other personal consequences. Now that's my own "risk assessment" - but I really don't think we should allow minors to make that assessment and take on that responsibility for themselves.

And, certainly, if we go for flagged revisions, one option would be to require those approving edits to be of a legally responsible age. I know of plenty publications that publish the work of children - but none that allow children to make final editorial decisions.

[Moulton]

RfC? Request for Cartoons?

I don't think age restrictions should be required for general editing. However, I do think that wikipedia often forgets that it isn't just a community, it is a very visible publisher. And publishing information has huge moral and legal implications for both the subjects and the publishers.

Any university that has a Department of Journalism and Communication where students learn the art of publishing stories purporting to be non-fiction accounts of contemporary society has a required course in Mass Media Ethics. No student can graduate with university credentials in journalism without passing that course, and no reputable publisher will hire a young journalist who has not passed those requirements.

Wikipedia is the fifth largest website on the planet, publishing non-fiction accounts of contemporary society on every imaginable subject save one (there is no article on Narcissistic Wounding). Not only are the editors of Wikipedia unschooled in Mass Media Ethics, they are teaching and practicing just the opposite culture from responsible journalism. They have guzzled the Kool Aid and clambored aboard the Jimbonic Jackboot Juggernaut, utterly oblivious that they are reprising the Stanford Prison Experiment as cyberspace drama that I view as a post-modern, pre-apocalyptic theater of the absurd.

Just last night, someone calling themselves Baseball Bugs Bunny played the role of Elmer Fudd, blasting away at that Wascally Wabbit, as if an RfC were a Saturday morning cartoon.

Yes, but wikipedia isn't a university department; it is a popular website with a mass-participation project.

So, one can legitimately say that, given that fact, it has no business calling itself an encyclopedia, or hosting information on individuals. However, if that's your take, then how, short of legislation are you going to get your way?

The same way Billie Holiday went about it. Cultural changes require a change in consciousness. And changes in consciousness enter the culture through popular art. I'm an atrocious artist, to be sure, but I have faith that better artists will come along to outperform me.

Title: Strange Freight
Artist: Billie Clubaday
Composer: Abel Meeropol (aka Lewis Allan) and Barsoom Tork Associates
YouTube: Strange Fruit (Billie Holiday)

Modern trains bear strange freight
Blocks on the switches and bans to bait,
Banhammers swinging in the Wikisphere tracks,
Strange tools echoing whistled bootjacks.

Utopian scene of the gallant youth,
Games denied by the anxious mouse,
Scent of Kool Aid, sweet and cool,
Then the sudden smack of a Wiki fool.

Here is freight for non-cows to block,
For the pain to gather, for the tunes to mock,
For the pun to zap, for El Reg to rock,
Here is a strange and bitter sock.

CopyClef 2008 Abel Meeropol (aka Lewis Allan) and Barsoom Tork Associates.
Resurrection Hackware. All wrongs reversed.

This post has been edited by Moulton:

[Doc glasgow]

RfC? Request for Cartoons?

I don't think age restrictions should be required for general editing. However, I do think that wikipedia often forgets that it isn't just a community, it is a very visible publisher. And publishing information has huge moral and legal implications for both the subjects and the publishers.

Any university that has a Department of Journalism and Communication where students learn the art of publishing stories purporting to be non-fiction accounts of contemporary society has a required course in Mass Media Ethics. No student can graduate with university credentials in journalism without passing that course, and no reputable publisher will hire a young journalist who has not passed those requirements.

Wikipedia is the fifth largest website on the planet, publishing non-fiction accounts of contemporary society on every imaginable subject save one (there is no article on Narcissistic Wounding). Not only are the editors of Wikipedia unschooled in Mass Media Ethics, they are teaching and practicing just the opposite culture from responsible journalism. They have guzzled the Kool Aid and clambored aboard the Jimbonic Jackboot Juggernaut, utterly oblivious that they are reprising the Stanford Prison Experiment as cyberspace drama that I view as a post-modern, pre-apocalyptic theater of the absurd.

Just last night, someone calling themselves Baseball Bugs Bunny played the role of Elmer Fudd, blasting away at that Wascally Wabbit, as if an RfC were a Saturday morning cartoon.

Yes, but wikipedia isn't a university department it is a popular website with a mass-participation project.

So, one can legitimately say that, given that fact, it has no business calling itself an encyclopedia, or hosting information on individuals. However, if that's your take, then how, short of legislation are you going to get your way?

The other possibility is to recognise what wikipedia is, and look for it to realistic steps to mitigate against the harm it may cause. Here, I think, the foundation needs to warn all users about the possible personal implications and liabilities. You can't stop people messing about and playing MORPG, but you need to warn that there can be real-world consequences - personally, ethically, and legally, which may impact on your finances, reputation, and employment prospects - not to mention the impact you may have on others.

I also think that, having issued this warning, the Foundation policy should actively discourage all legal minors from editing wikipedia. No, you can't prevent it, any more than you can prevent ten your olds accessing internet porn, but you can state that it is undesirable and officially discouraged. Beyond that, I'd be content with a "don't ask, don't tell" policy on age. Act like an adult and you might get away with it......but you have been warned.

[Doc glasgow]

Oh yes, I am extremely ageist!

(If you have a problem with that, don't worry. You will grow out of it.)

This post has been edited by Doc glasgow: