User:Fifelfoo/CERFC

Please skip to  Fifelfoo (talk) 23:05, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

General questions
These questions are intended to try to determine what you may consider the "baseline" between what should be considered "valid collegiate discourse" and what should be considered "violation of the civility policy" (incivility). Please be as specific as you can in your responses.

Written versus spoken communication
When one is physically present when speaking with another person, body language, intonation, setting, and other physical factors, can suggest the intent of words in a way that words written on a page cannot.

Collegiality
Example: if a person is having a casual conversation with friends over a table covered with beer glasses and one of them wishes to contest a point another has made they might prefect their remarks with "listen up asshole and I'll explain it to you." If they are smiling and raising a glass towards the person this remark is pointed, it can help the words to be taken in the lighthearted manner in which it was intended.

Should such interaction as noted in the example above be considered incivility in the collegiate, collaborative environment of Wikipedia? Should the talk page location matter (such as whether the discussion is on a user talk page, an article talk page, or Wikipedia project-space talk page)?


 * Reply: This question is fucking stupid. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Profanity
Should all profanity (such as the use of "bad words", "four letter words", "the Seven dirty words", etc.), be considered incivility?


 * Reply: No. Again, this question is fucking stupid.  It is disconnected from encyclopaedic practice and the reality of English as a language. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

All caps/wiki markup
There is an established convention when using technology to communicate through a typed format that WRITING IN ALL CAPS is considered "yelling" and is generally not acceptable. Individuals also sometimes use italics bolding green or other colored text or even enlarged text or other formatting code to attempt to indicate intonation, or to otherwise emphasize their comments.

Should there be limits as to when this type of formatting should be used in a discussion? Is there any type of formatting which should never be acceptable in a discussion?


 * Reply: This is entirely contingent and contextual. Take your attempts to be a little Marat back to the 18th century—for more details watch Marat/Sade by Weiss until the message on attempts to totalise morality sink in. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:37, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Responsibility for enforcement
Who is responsible for maintaining a civil environment for collegiate discussion? Should it be it the responsibility of administrators, the arbitration committee, the broader Wikipedia community, or some combination of these?


 * Reply: We escalate from failure. Why is this question being asked when so much process is evident in practice. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Appropriate sanctions
What sanctions, if any, do you think are appropriate for incivility? Should blocking be considered an appropriate response to incivility? Should topic banning or interaction banning be considered an appropriate response?


 * Reply: Little fucking Marat. This question is insulting and begs the fucking question. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Context
Should the context of the situation be taken into account when considering whether to apply sanctions to the individual due to incivility?


 * Reply: No, of course the context shouldn't be taken into account, language is clearly totalisable and fully knowable by human beings. Seriously, this is fucking insulting. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Severity
How severe should a single incident of incivility need to be to merit some sort of sanction?


 * Reply: … I believe I have previously adequately stated my contempt for this specious exercise in question begging. How many fingers should we cut off for treason? Fifelfoo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Instances of incivility
Should multiple instances of incivility in the same discussion be considered one offense or several? If a user is civil most of the time, but occasionally has instances of incivility, should these incidents be excused? If so, how often should such incivility be excused?


 * Reply: See above. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Weighing incivility and contributions
Should the quality and/or number of contributions an individual makes outside of discussions have any bearing on whether an individual should be sanctioned due to incivility? Should the incidents of incivility be taken on their own as a separate concern?


 * Reply: See above. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Outcry
In the past, when an individual has been blocked from editing due to "violating the civility policy" (incivility), there has, at times, been an outcry from others concerning the block, and sometimes the block has been overturned subsequent to that outcry.

In an effort to reduce incidences of such an outcry ("drama"), should incivility be deprecated as an appropriate reason for blocking an individual? Should admins instead be required to have a more specific reason (such as personal attacks, harassment of another user, etc.), when blocking a user for incivility?


 * Reply: Oh for fucks sake, if you're going to shoot him in the back of the head stop putting a fig leaf over it. This RFC is despicable conduct. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Generally
This RFC is horrific question begging and displays a Bonapartism which should outrage all decent people. You can stick this RFC up your fucking arseholes. This isn't the handmaiden's tale, and I refuse to participate in a question begging exercise. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)