X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Tue Jan 27 20:03:56 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <929ed1ec0901270426i363aafecy5e2c5b5c9c864a99@mail.gmail.com>
References: <929ed1ec0901270044x3c52baacuad3b41104f45aed1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4f045a880901270047y5f656256p729d6352ba35b09f@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0901270213i7b291ce8ifc421f6650253dfa@mail.gmail.com>
	<4f045a880901270312q1f261590r1e3d93c137dfd171@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0901270426i363aafecy5e2c5b5c9c864a99@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 21:03:50 +0200
Message-ID: <929ed1ec0901271103p21b68dbdw6cd35c5dcd8c2d47@mail.gmail.com>
From: Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 0.3
X-Spam_score_int: 3
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 14:26, Digwuren
	<digwuren@gmail.com> wrote: > Don't get too wordy. Especially on AN/I, 
	people tend to assume that the > side who talks more, or who gets overly
	defensive, is most likely the guilty > one. > [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.3 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	1.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] A possibly developing funwar
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/private/folks>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4276106875342525398=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 1
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 14:26, Digwuren
	<digwuren@gmail.com> wrote: > Don't get too wordy. Especially on AN/I,
	people tend to assume that the > side who talks more, or who gets overly
	defensive, is most likely the guilty > one. > [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.1 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0088]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	1.0 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============4276106875342525398==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d9a0f5fe17fa04617b8316

--0016e6d9a0f5fe17fa04617b8316
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 14:26, Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com> wrote:

> Don't get too wordy.  Especially on AN/I, people tend to assume that the
> side who talks more, or who gets overly defensive, is most likely the guilty
> one.
>

This might merit some further comment.

It would seem there's a cultural rift here.  In some cultures, it's expected
that the innocent party will take extra interest in sorting out spurious
claims, so as to clean up his (or her) reputation.  As far as I know, it's
common among most Northern European people, including Estonians (but my
sources are unclear about the Sami people, which is an interesting case but
of little significance here).  Several codes of honour -- such as the
Japanese bushido -- around the world also take this or some strongly related
approach.

In some other cultures, however, it is expected that the guilty party will
take extra interest in creating a lot of useless and confusing stories about
accusations directed against them, and that the innocent party cares little
about spurious accusations.  This approach can apparently be found among
many Slavic and Middle Eastern people, as well as several major American
cultural strains (although probably for different reasons).

It appears that Wikipedia's userbase tends to the second camp, partially
through its dramu-aversion.  Thus, I believe that, in Wikipedia's
discussions directed towards large readership, it is counterproductive to
stress defence too much.  The best tactic seems to be making a clarifying
statement for benefit of any possible neutral passersby (whom, usually,
there aren't many), and leave the thread be.

-- 
Andres Soolo

--0016e6d9a0f5fe17fa04617b8316
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 14:26, Digwuren <span di=
r=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:digwuren@gmail.com">digwuren@gmail.com</a>&=
gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 =
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"Ih2E3d">Don&#39;t get too wordy. &=
nbsp;Especially on AN/I, people tend to assume that the side who talks more=
, or who gets overly defensive, is most likely the guilty one.</div></div><=
/blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>This might merit some further comment.</div><div><br></=
div><div>It would seem there&#39;s a cultural rift here. &nbsp;In some cult=
ures, it&#39;s expected that the innocent party will take extra interest in=
 sorting out spurious claims, so as to clean up his (or her) reputation. &n=
bsp;As far as I know, it&#39;s common among most Northern European people, =
including Estonians (but my sources are unclear about the Sami people, whic=
h is an interesting case but of little significance here). &nbsp;Several co=
des of honour -- such as the Japanese bushido -- around the world also take=
 this or some strongly related approach.</div>
<div><br></div><div>In some other cultures, however, it is expected that th=
e guilty party will take extra interest in creating a lot of useless and co=
nfusing stories about accusations directed against them, and that the innoc=
ent party cares little about spurious accusations. &nbsp;This approach can =
apparently be found among many Slavic and Middle Eastern people, as well as=
 several major American cultural strains (although probably for different r=
easons).</div>
<div><br></div><div>It appears that Wikipedia&#39;s userbase tends to the s=
econd camp, partially through its dramu-aversion. &nbsp;Thus, I believe tha=
t, in Wikipedia&#39;s discussions directed towards large readership, it is =
counterproductive to stress defence too much. &nbsp;The best tactic seems t=
o be making a clarifying statement for benefit of any possible neutral pass=
ersby (whom, usually, there aren&#39;t many), and leave the thread be.</div=
>
<div><br></div><div>--&nbsp;<br></div></div>Andres Soolo<br>

--0016e6d9a0f5fe17fa04617b8316--


--===============4276106875342525398==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

--===============4276106875342525398==--


