User talk:Lar

Hi, I am Larry Pieniazek, I like LEGO and I am not notable. I edit more on the English Wikipedia than anywhere else, so for best results either mail me, or leave me a message on my talk page there: w:User_talk:Lar... thanks!

Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia
If we cross some line in your opinion, feel free to say so. We may not agree with you, but we need input from everybody. These issues need a deft touch and your input can be very helpful. WAS 4.250 06:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I will do that, and I appreciate your forthrightness. I've already voiced a concern that I think it's better to be safe than sorry when it comes to "outing". I don't personally think that means you can't link to entire sites where outing (per the en:wp definition) has happened. I don't see that as a reasonable restriction at all, it's far too broad. But directly linking to pages where it has been done seems like it is not prudent. ++Lar: t/c 16:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that it is an important consideration. But at some point, the information is out there and can not be again made secret. At some point, it simply becomes a matter of being polite to not mention what everybody knows. But to allow Wikipedia to be disrupted to this degree over a secret that is no longer secret is dysfunctional. People who claim that their livelihoods will be destroyed if their real name is revealed should be banned for their own good as well as our good. Accountability and project health should outweigh the "right" of any one person to edit. We should not be a battleground, nor a therapy for those who can are so addicted to editing Wikipedia that they continue to edit even when it endangers their livelihood. WAS 4.250 17:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * There is much in the above I agree with... "people who claim that their livelihoods will be destroyed" ... yes, we saw a bit of that sort of hyperbolic hysteria on Wednesday evening, didn't we? My real name is out there for all to see, and always has been, ever since I started editing at WP. (I think it was within my first dozen edits that I put it on my user page). So in part I may not completely see the concerns of those who wish to edit pseudonymously as clearly as I might. And MAYBE I'm swinging the pendulum too far but I just think that the (defacto ?) policy of not directly linking to pages where concordances are published and the like seems a good one. Even if the cat is out of the bag. Sometimes policies, in order to be easily applicable and crisp, may lead to some inconsistency in outcome in specific cases. That's OK, I think. A clear rule, applied consistently, strikes me as more ethical than case by case reasoning. You and I know that one of the areas for improvement of WP is in the "applied consistently" part. But tis still what I think.


 * For that reason I favour caution, especially here with this project to explore ethics. There is plenty of material available for a comprehensive work without directly linking to problematic things. Why not be prudent, and move the project forward, rather than standing on principle and giving critics easy ammo? ++Lar: t/c 17:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree in principle. I am encouraging everyone to be as sensitive as they can be. WAS 4.250 17:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Good deal. I've made my caution known so I consider the proximate matter sorted. People will act on that caution as they see fit. Best. ++Lar: t/c 17:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Privacy policy
If you have any comments/suggestions on the embryonic Wikiversity privacy policy, please feel welcome to edit the page or comment on the talk page. --JWSchmidt 01:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)