User talk:Clio the Muse~enwikiversity

Hello Clio the Muse, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. When leaving comments for others to read, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone keep track of who is writing messages. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To help you get started:
 * Take a guided tour and learn how to edit;
 * Explore our learning projects;
 * Browse our portals, schools, and research pages; and
 * Read and help develop our community policies.

If you're already excited about editing, our sandbox is the perfect place for all test edits. Also, don't forget to experiment with the links to your left. Be bold, and see you around Wikiversity!

P.S. Do you want live feedback ? You can find us in #wikiversity-en (see Chat) --JWSchmidt 02:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

civility
I just read your comments at Request custodian action. I feel more comfortable responding to your comments here because there is still no explicit request for custodian action. First, I want to make sure that you are aware of the Wikiversity policy about civility. Everyone is invited to remove incivil talk page comments. You should feel free to remove talk page comments that bother you. I suspect you are aware of this, but have your reasons for not acting to personally remove incivil talk page comments. What follows is a rather long-winded attempt to get you to change your mind about that.

In simple terms, I think you want me (or any other custodian) to act while I'd like you to act. In this stand off, I suspect we might be struggling against the effects of some fundamental barriers to effective communication. I'm tempted to say that there are cultural barriers involved, but I am reluctant to make too many assumptions about the backgrounds of individuals who I do not know well. However, I am fairly familiar with the cultures of Wikipedia and Wikiversity, so it might be safe for me to make a few comments about the differences between those two cultures.....comments that I think are relevant to the discussion at Request custodian action.

In some cultures people are encouraged to speak bluntly and develop a "thick skin". In other cultures people rarely hear direct criticism and feel that their honor is seriously damaged by even a minor insult. I suppose some people even tell themselves that their honor is reduced if they have to explain their sense of honor to people who do not share that same sense of honor. As soon as such positions (if you need that explained then you are not worth my time) are adopted, effective cross-cultural communication becomes impossible. In the case of Wikipedia, I think there has been a strong cultural trend towards trying to win arguments by provoking other editors and then punishing them for their use of "personal attacks". Some editors are very skilled at using subtle forms of insult while other editors are more direct when trading insults. It can come as a surprise to nobody that the blocks and bans are collected by the editors who are not subtle. At Wikiversity there has been an attempt to develop a different culture, one where the game of provoke/punish is not played. Given this cultural difference between Wikipedia and Wikiversity, it might be a shock for Wikipedians to discover that incivility is dealt with in a different way here.

I am puzzled by the fact that you have long known about the Wikiversity editing of Loomis/Lewis but now seem to be expecting Wikiversity custodians to step in and remove months old comments. From my perspective, the most direct path towards that goal is for you to remove any comments that you feel are incivil. The Wikiversity community is slowly working towards consensus on additional methods that will give us more options for dealing with participants who are not constructive editors, but for now the civility policy is our best tool for dealing with the incivil Loomis/Lewis. The Wikiversity civility policy does not really call upon custodians to play any special role in dealing with incivility.

Both you and other Wikipedians seem to be expecting custodians to spring into action at the mention of "attacks". Within Wikipedia nobody need explain such a strategy; there is always an administrator nearby who specializes in tasks such as removing attacks from talk pages. That just is not the case at Wikiversity. I guess it is possible that a custodian might be prodded into acting by suggesting that failure to so will be damaging to the credibility and value of the Wikiversity project. I can only speak for myself, and this is where other cultural variations come into play. In addition to valuing civility, I value honesty, exploration, free speech, academic freedom and empowering people to solve their own problems. I've known people who gladly admit, "I'm a real bastard," and they laugh heartily if anyone agrees with them. Personal experience has taught me not to jump to conclusions about what people consider to be incivil. I encourage you to trust your own subjective experience of your own feelings to guide you in removing comments from Wikiversity talk pages that you feel are not civil comments. "I leave it to your good sense to decide what is best." --JWSchmidt 04:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you, JW, both for the welcome and for the above message; but I really am not here to stay. Why did I raise this now when I have been aware of it for months?  If you read what I wrote on your custodians desk again (if you can bare to read it again!) you will see that a recent debate on Wikipedia, and the attendant advocacy of Wikiversity, was the immediate context of this issue being aired as it has.  I personally would have left the whole thing alone; for the remarks in question, their sheer incoherence, have caused me amusement, more than aything else.  However, for reasons I fully understand Wikipedia administrators brought the problem here, hence the lengthy debate on the custodian's page.  SB_Johnny invited me to give a view, and I did.  I think it would be quite the wrong thing for me personally to take on these indiividuals here; I can predict with some accuracy what the outcome of that would be.  But I am tough, and I really could not care less for their onslaught on me here.  You are now aware of this situation; you are now aware of Loomis/Lewis.  I personally am content to leave it at that.  My best wishes.  Clio the Muse 05:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Insight Requested
Clio, I am not at all familar with the above situation. I ended up here perusing the recent changes log. Can you share with me why you do not find this site of long term interest and thus will not be sticking around? I have been expecting explosive growth in the site community and I am at a loss why this is not occurring. Any insight you can provide regarding why you do not find Wikiversity of use or interest in the short or long term would be greatly appreciated!. Thanks. Mirwin 06:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, Mirwin. I really do not think there is a place for Clio here.  You see, I only became aware of the existence of Wikiversity earlier this year, when some of your users were specifically developing it into a kind or redoubt from which to launch unrestrained attacks against me, the kind of personal offensive that could not be mounted on Wikipedia.  I have no choice but to share Wikipedia with two of the individuals in question, but there I can avoid them and am offered a degree of protection by the civility rules.  I note that you also have civility rules here, though how they are applied would seem to be considerably more lax.  For me Wikiversity has come to be associated with the worst forms of personal venom.  It's unfortunate, I know, and if I had come here from a different angle, and with a different kind of history, things might have been different.  Sadly, I did not.


 * On your wider point-and trying to depersonalise the issues-it seems to me that Wikiversity will always be in the shadow of Wikipedia, which has grown, I suppose, into a kind of internet monster! Look it the issue from another dimension: have you ever asked yourself how Wikiversity would cope with the kind of dramatic growth that you were hoping would occur?  I do not know what your own intellectual speciality is: mine is in history.  Even with the forms of control and supervision that exist on Wikipedia many of the pages on modern history are little better than political battlegrounds, disgracefully so, in some cases.  Could you cope with that here?  Perhaps you could, though my instincts suggest not.  But I confess I am still not fully conversant with the purpose of Wikiversity.  If circumstances had been different I might have helped where I could (my intellect is razor sharp; far too sharp for some!), but they were not.  Take care and visit me at Wikipedia any time you wish.  All the best from Anastasia, also Clio the Muse 22:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * That's an interesting question - whether Wikiversity would be able to cope with Wikipedia-style growth, particularly with heated topics. My broad take on that is that, while Wikipedia strives for a single article on a given subject, Wikiversity allows for multiple resources to be developed which give different perspectives on the given topic. However, we have been saying this for longer than we have been actually doing it - and how our ideas and policies work in practice largely remains to be seen. Cormaggio talk 23:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment by A.Z.
"'Well, now I'm confused. At first I thought these remarks by Clio were evidence that she was an antisemite. I thought she wanted to kill Jewish people inside a gas chamber and she would do magic to curse them. Now I don't know if all of this is just my imagination. I hope to hear Lewis's and StuRat's thoughts on this. And whether we should just go and ask her whether she is an antisemite or not. a.z.'"

One could, if they wish, interpret the paragraph above as an attack at Clio. It isn't, though. It is just me looking for help concerning a subject that I wanted to learn more about. I expect she understands that I have never accused her of being a witch and wanting to gas all Jews. I said that I had thought she wanted to kill Jewish people inside a gas chamber. I also said I had thought she would do magic to curse them, though another possibility was that she had referred to black magic only as a metaphor, and wouldn't actually perform it. I have said on that same thread, 20 days after I started it, "I now realize that my original interpretation of those comments is silly. Thank you both for your help". Nevertheless, I never got the help I needed to understand why, if she wasn't an antisemite and a witch, she had looked like that to me. I understand now that my approach at trying to solve the problem was not well chosen, and it would be considerably better if I had talked to her at her talk page, and tried to explain my concerns more clearly. I am sorry for all that happened. a.z. 02:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Clio the Muse. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Clio the Muse~enwikiversity that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:05, 19 April 2015 (UTC)