On Jul 31, 2:32 pm, Pete B <
blu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> RocWiki is not a business and to look at it through that prism may bring
> some overly-high expectations. We are a group of people with a hobby
> (sometimes obsession) ...
Successful nonprofit organizations, including completely volunteer
ones, have learned how important a more "business-like" and
entrepreneurial spirit is to achieving goals and meeting expectations.
RocWiki has built a tool that impacts significant stakeholders in the
political, social, and business communities, not to mention the
editors who have put themselves into the mix. It has become far more
than a hobby object. When one controls a tool that gets into the top 5
hits in search engines, it is way beyond a hobby. RocWiki now
represents Rochester in many ways.
> I disagree that the statement that the yellow was "tacky" was personal----it
> wasn't meant that way at all. It came off to me as unnecessarily "loud" and
> I thought a tamer quieter archiving statement was more appropriate. The one
> we are using now is exactly that.
Tacky is, by definition, a pejorative term: (TheDictionary.com)
"a. Lacking style or good taste; tawdry: tacky clothes.
b. Distasteful or offensive; tasteless: a tacky remark."
Try once to describe a piece of your loved-ones clothing as Tacky and
you will get substantial reinforcement that this IS a PERSONAL word.
All of the most successful wikis, such as Davis Wiki, that came out of
WikiSpot use the yellow tables with a graphic for important includes,
including Stub, NPOV, Photo Wanted, etc,... It appears at the top of
RocWiki's Recent Changes page.We live in a yellow highlighter world.
> The other day when a novice user posted on "Info Needed" you just hid it
> without letting her know what she did wrong (Powless). My point is let's
> educate people when they make an error like that...not just blow it off.
> Maybe we can prevent it from occuring again. That is why I requested you do
> it as you deleted the comment. Again it was not a personal attack and it is
> apparent you took it that way.
>
You ASSUMED (and we know how that breaks down). Personally, I strongly
disagree with creating user pages for them - as you are inclined to do
(and believe I mentioned quite early on,). I have had little success
leaving messages in these PeteB created pages. I have talked with
RocWiki viewers who place less credence on Users with dash underlined
(no page) User names. I agree with this assessment.
In any event, I chose to communicate with PowlessA via email and spent
time working on the pages she was trying to modify.
More importantly the underlying point gets to my philosphy to jump in
and get the job done, even when the fix takes longer than a message. A
review of my edits found several dozen recent pages you edited where I
jumped right in and fixed errors or omissions without me trying to
"educate" you.. That is my vision of how a wiki community effort
works.
> I will try to be more considerate and expressive in my concerns in the
> future.
>
THANKS