Talk:Workgroup:Code of Conduct/1st Draft
- [View source↑]
- [History↑]
Contents
| Thread title | Replies | Last modified |
|---|---|---|
| Consistency of heading capitalisation | 3 | 13:32, 10 March 2011 |
| Essence - sufficient? | 5 | 13:32, 10 March 2011 |
| Simply adopt an existing code of conduct? | 0 | 14:49, 14 January 2011 |
Most of the headings in the draft code are written with the first letter of each major word capitalised, but a few are not. For consistency all of the titles should be written in the same style.
I would have just revised the few that were different, except that I've noticed that there is somewhat of a de facto style on WikiEducator of capitalising only the first word in a title or heading, e.g., Open Community Governance Policy (Draft 2). I've come to prefer this style.
Any objection to my revising the headings to only capitalise first letter of first word?
Alison
No objection from me. For this page especially the (hopefully self-explanatory) Table of Contents will read better with the convention you suggest.
There may be occasions when capitalising each word in a heading is appropriate (e.g. when the heading is also a title such as "WikiEducator Community Council" or "Deputy Chair", etc.).
Thanks.
Good. I made the changes.
I agree about proper names being capitalised in the heading. A style guideline addressing capitalisation was proposed awhile back. The style guideline workgroup fell into disuse after Jesse Groppi discontinued her work in WE.
Alison
Useful words/phrases/quotes:
- considerate
- respectful
- politeness
- humility
- assuming good faith
- listen first
- "Grant that we may not so much seek to be understood as to understand" - Saint Francis of Assisi
- play the ball, not the person.
- in accordance with WikiEducator values ...
- constructive criticism
- appreciation
- accommodate diverse perspectives - celebrate diversity
- trust
- ...
Do we need to add "Knowledgeableness" ( or some other word with the same meaning)also in the list of values in the introduction? Anil Prasad 03:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Interesting idea. We certainly value knowledge but the philosophical question arises: what is it? In the Declaration on libre_knowledge on values we used the wording:
- Libre Communities value:
- the members and their diverse perspectives
- etc.
- Libre Communities value:
i.e. we value community members and their perspectives - rather than referring to the "amount" of "knowledge" they might have. Following that line of thinking, the first word in the list of values, "diversity" (possibly) covers it.
Regarding the word "Knowledgeableness" I have also encountered "knowledgeability" whose definition implies an ability to use one's knowledge wisely. This is something we would value in our community. For example, the libre knowledge vision includes the phrase "Knowledge for all, freedom to learn, towards collective wisdom".
I'm okay with adding knowledgeability, but it's more important that the list of values be consistent with published WE values. In fact the list on this first draft is from draft governance policy and are not consistent with the "values" listed on the bottom right of the WE main page. (Although there is a slight difference in meaning between the two instances of values...noun vs. verb, it seems to me that WE need only one version.)
I prefer the list of values from the draft governance policy (simpler, more comprehensive, more interpretable) and, although not related to this project per se, suggest WE consider revising the main page to use the list.
Thoughts?
I support the idea of revising the values listed on the main page to those listed in the draft open community governance policy:
diversity, freedom, innovation, transparency, equality, inclusivity, empowerment, human dignity, wellbeing and sustainability.
(without adding "Knowledgeableness" or "knowledgeability").
Such as the Ununtu Code of Conduct?
- The current version is a derivation. What might it be missing for WikiEducator? - Kim Tucker 01:48, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
