WikiFur talk:Assume good faith

Introduction to this article

This is the first of a series of guidelines that I have volunteered to write. At GreenReaper's suggestion, I am boldly creating the pages; though in the spirit of consensus I would ask other editors, and administrators, to help to improve it. --CodyDenton 08:45, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey, that's great %) In Russian WikiFur, we were ought to make Consensus essay (Google-translated) some time ago, as well as few other essays and guidelines. They helped much on occasions! We don't have local AGF essay (it wasn't required yet), but I will watch for your future contribution for interwikis. EvilCat 10:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiFur's Lack Of Dispute Resolution Process

I couldn't help but notice WikiFur still does not have any sort of dispute resolution process, even though it's suggested that editors having a conflict are supposed to ask an administrator for help instead of edit warring, and even though the lack thereof has damaged WikiFur's credibility as a resource in the past.

Particularly puzzling is the claim that "WikiFur administrators and other experienced editors who are not involved in dispute resolution will usually be glad to help, and are very capable of identifying policy-breaching conduct if their attention is drawn to clear and specific evidence." Do any of the WikiFur Admins actually follow this procedure, or is it just a bunch of empty words? Past experience has demonstrated the latter to be the case, and while I'm not a fortune-teller, I get the feeling this isn't really a pressing concern among the WikiFur Admins and isn't going to be resolved any time soon.

I am curious as to why the powers that be at WikiFur are so opposed to implementing a dispute resolution process similar to Wikipedia's? —Xydexx 22:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I reiterate: Do any of the WikiFur Admins actually follow this procedure, or is it just a bunch of empty words? —Xydexx 23:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I've rolled back your edits to this article, and I'd like to explain why. It seems counterintuitive to me that, if you want to see a guidance page created, you remove the redlinks. Redlinks are there for a reason: to point out to other editors articles that need to be written. If you look at my User: page you'll see that I have had plans to write additional guidance documents. However, I'm a volunteer, and my RL job and my family both have to come before my time editing WikiFur. I think I was once referred to as "the mysterious Cody Denton" but in fact, I'm just a regular editor, not an administrator -- a simple, ordinary volunteer trying to make WikiFur a better place. I can't help but notice that all of our admins are also volunteers, and thus are probably subject to the same issues -- work, family, school, whatever. This isn't Wikipedia. It's a very small organization by comparison. We don't have the number of active editors for things to always move at a rapid pace. But I'd like to believe that we all have a common goal, and that's to make WikiFur a valuable resource for the fandom. It's a valid good faith assumption. I can't imagine someone devoting hundreds and even thousands of hours to this site unless they have a sincere desire to make it better for everyone.

Please, rather than removing redlinks and placing dispute tags, recognize that these pages are being written by volunteers who really do have a life outside of WikiFur. Editors who really do believe in the project and who want to contribute to it the best they can, when they can. Instead of being a vocal and harsh critic of the admins, assuming bad faith, consider that they too are human (no matter what their avatar might suggest) and that as such, they've got their own share of life stresses to deal with -- and that, for example, working long hours on the job to meet a deadline (so as to KEEP said job) may have to take precedence over settling a dispute over an article on WikiFur. Passions can run high sometimes, but let's face it: if no one is dead, dying, or bleeding, it's probably not an emergency.

As for the other guidance documents that haven't been drafted yet, I'll get to them when I can, if another editor doesn't do it sooner. I don't "make policy" though. I've submitted drafts of guidelines that are based on "best practices" from a number of Wiki communities. Those guidelines can be adapted and tweaked by fellow editors. I don't speak for the entire WikiFur community, but one has to start somewhere, and that means that someone has to step up and write the initial documents. It's up to the community to refine them.

I hope that I've answered to your satisfaction what my involvement is in this project, and hopefully also offered some food for thought. You've raised some valid concerns, and I agree that WikiFur needs a dispute resolution process that works. Perhaps we can all get on the same side and collaborate on deciding that. I, for one, don't want to invest the energy into arguing, that I could otherwise be investing into editing. I'd like to believe that these issues can be resolved without escalation and accusation. To be clear: I'm not interested in buying into a firefight. I'll give the courtesy of explaining myself once, but I'm not going to get into a comment storm about it. --CodyDenton 12:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Xydexx, there is now a proposed dispute resolution policy up. I'd love to see your thoughts and ideas on it. --GingerM ^{(Leave me a message)} 06:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)