Re: Aside on collaboration

On 13 July 2018 at 03:23, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 at 14:07, David Elie Raymond Christophe Ammouial <
> david.elie.raymond.christophe.ammouial@everis.com> wrote:
>
>> [...] I would recommend stopping using the invented phrase "Royalist
>> English" if you seek credibility as a standards advocate. Plus it's
>> provocative, which is not a favorable attitude inside consensus-seeking
>> dynamics. Some people have already expressed their feeling about that and
>> have been ignored.
>>
>
> On that point... And not to pick on Joe's contributions here particularly;
> we have had two or three big email threads in recent weeks in which other
> discussions have also got a bit more ... heated and accusational than was
> probably necessary. The Wikipedia community have documented a principle of "assuming
> good faith <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith>"
> which (while easier said than done) is something I think would be good
> guidance for us here. Humour often doesn't come across well in email, even
> if smilies and emoticons are used.
>
> Personally, I will admit to tending to tune out when people use
> provocative language and a confrontational style, especially when it's in
> their opening statements and a calmer approach hasn't even been tried
> first. While I'm glad to see that there has apparently been something
> salvaged from the provocation in terms of improved language around camps, I
> would much rather we pay equal or greater attention to contributions that
> are practical and consensus oriented than those that yell "you're all doing
> it wrong!". If we encourage community habits that reward shouting and
> confrontation, and we're still here in another five years' time, ... we'll
> all be shouting and yelling or burned out by then.
>
> As Community Group chair (and project webmaster, dogsbody etc.), I have
> some responsibility here to balance free expression with hosting a forum
> that is welcoming and non-threatening to all-comers and that actually helps
> gets useful things done. I have noticed that whenever we get these big mail
> threads, we often see a bunch of mailing list unsubscriptions. Phrasing
> that might seem friendly and fun in a human setting amongst friends can
> have quite a different impact on mailing lists, where you have (hopefully)
> a group of people from very diverse backgrounds, culturally,
> linguistically, professionally, etc. It might be less fun but it's better
> to be boring than edgy when writing here.  I also know from personal
> communication that some very able and experienced people find this email
> list rather too intimidating to participate in, and prefer to contribute in
> other settings. Please all bear these kinds of dynamics in mind when
> expressing yourselves here.
>
> On the "Schema.org eurocentrism" thread specifics, we generally strive
> towards neutral, broadly understandable use of English. We have a separate
> activity <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/280> on mapping
> our terms to those in the Wikidata project, which is the language-neutral
> database (or "Knowledge Graph") shared by all the language-specific
> Wikipedias. Contributing via Github to those mappings, so we can make use
> of the multi-linguage translations held in Wikidata, would be a vastly more
> useful thing to do than sending shouty emails. For example,
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q832778 ('camp site' etc.) is linked to 30
> different language wikis, and has translated labels and "also known as"
> phrases.
>
> In a few cases Schema.org has had to pick a spelling variant and when in
> that situation we go with the US variant, so we chose "color" over
> "colour". In other cases when a phrase is involved e.g.
> https://pending.schema.org/WorkersUnion - we have tried to use something
> that is clear, avoiding "Trade Union" vs "Labor Union" vs "Labour Union",
> even if "WorkersUnion" is a somewhat less familiar formulation. Schema.org
> is a project for the whole Web and not just for the United States of
> America, and has benefited from contributions and collaborations from all
> around the world. It is documented in English and frequently updated, which
> makes complete translations difficult, but it is unambiguously meant for
> global use. While it's far from perfect, we are not going to reach our full
> potential here if contributors choose to waste their time arguing in email
> when they could be building things or collaborating in more practical ways.
>
> cheers,
>

Danbri, as a fellow CG chair, I can assure you that you are not, and will
never be, a "dogsbody".

Sorry that you were triggered by this, but factual is that your speling is,
OK.


>
> Dan
> (native English speaker, European, lifelong non-Royalist, and current US
> immigrant)
>