Wikipedia talk:Concordia/Meeting 1

message: Meeting closed. Minutes available on project page. Computerjoe's talk 17:02, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

message: == Name Change ==
Many users on Wikipedia talk:Community Justice and it's archive have stressed how they want a name change. I'm wishing to get councillor's opinions on changing our name from Community Justice to something else. If you are in favour of a namechange, please suggest an alternative. Computerjoe's talk 17:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections - • The Giant Puffin • 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Nope...no one should ever be penalized for making a bad joke. --Osbus 20:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection from me. - Pureblade | Θ 21:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Same. (^'-')^ Covington 00:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Probation Computerjoe's talk 19:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objections - • The Giant Puffin • 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objections for sure. — Ilyanep (Talk) 20:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No, don't think you did anything offensive. --Osbus 20:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection, nothing uncivil about using common shorthand. - Pureblade | Θ 21:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ditto. (^'-')^ Covington 23:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Great idea. Let's wait until we work out the final logo design so that we can place it on the barnstar. (^'-')^ Covington 02:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: If we can, I think we should retain control and somehow incoporate Community Justice into the text of the barnstar. --Osbus 20:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we take control, it won't be as widely used. Computerjoe's talk 20:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do we want it to be widely used? The value of the barnstar would go down...we should only give it to users who truly exemplify civility, etc. --Osbus 21:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We want to promote civility to the entire 'pedia; we shouldn't be elitist. I say we retain the authority of changing the text and such like that, but let anyone give it to anyone else that truly deserves it. - Pureblade | Θ 21:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't saying we should be elitist, I was saying we should give it to editors who truly deserve it. --Osbus 21:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Any Wikipedian should be able to give/receive. And really, we can't control it. I saw we say it was made by us, but send it to Wikipedia:Barnstars. Computerjoe's talk 07:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't saying we control who gives them out...I was saying we control the text, etc. When we give them to editors, we should give them to the most deserving. --Osbus 21:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: What do you think about sending it to Wikipedia:Barnstars but making a page listing the criteria for the Civility Barnstar and the receipients of the award. Any user may give it to any other user, but each award giver must add the receipient's list to the award page and provide a link to the award page somewhere on the Civility Barnstar. I hope this addresses everyone's concerns. (^'-')^ Covington 02:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd like to see them used more on actual article talk pages where things get heated, as it can be a good idea to remind all editors of such things. <Strike>I don't know if that's how the templates are intended to be used, though.</strike> — Ilyanep (Talk) 03:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *Quality not quantity, to use a clichèd statement...it seems to me that not many of our members are active in CJ. --Osbus 20:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I agree with Osbus; very few of the members have done anything after joining. - Pureblade | Θ 21:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *And perhaps we need to get a 'program' of sorts going to increase member involvement? — Ilyanep (Talk) 01:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I'm agreeing with you all. Now that we have a member base, we can start doing things as a community. Many people here seem to be excited about Community Justice; we can use that energy to get members more involved. May I suggest a member newsletter similar to that of Esperanza? We need to let members know what we're doing if we are to increase member involvement. (^'-')^ Covington 03:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I like the program idea. It can get members involved, as I too noticed that only a small percentage of our members have done anything since joining. Although I want a large memberbase, I would rather have half our current members if they all did something - • The Giant Puffin • 14:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: ****You know what we should do? We should welcome new users, make them feel a part of our happy community. --Osbus 01:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Also, an intra-organization newsletter would remind our members about Community Justice, and our awards will promote both our goals and or organization. Nice work, Giant Puffin. (^'-')^ Covington 03:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. As much as I love Esperanza, we don't want to be just a copy of what's already done. Nice suggestion, Tijauna Brass. (^'-')^ Covington 02:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont want us to be a copy. I just want us to maybe have a joint program where we can help each other in promoting civility etc. I dont mean we become permenant partners. Just a minor link between us and them. That's all that is needed - • The Giant Puffin • 19:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agenda 

message: Many users on Wikipedia talk:Community Justice and it's archive have stressed how they want a name change. I'm wishing to get councillor's opinions on changing our name from Community Justice to something else. If you are in favour of a namechange, please suggest an alternative. Computerjoe's talk 17:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name Change 

message: #I think the name Community Justice is misleading...it seems more like a name for the AMA. How about Civility Commision? As for the disruptive part, I don't think that should deter us from doing something that we should (or at least, I think we should). --Osbus 20:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Support 

message: #Too much disruption. Computerjoe's talk 18:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Opposition 

message: #Neutral - Although I feel the name is a little forceful and possibly could be changed for the better to suit our refined aims, I feel this could cause too much disruption, and so far it hasn't detered the 60 something users who have joined. Ian13/talk 17:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral/No opinion/abstain 

message: === Ethnopunk ===
I suspended one user,  over various personal attacks and the personal attack made on the CJ page itself . Computerjoe's talk 17:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections - • The Giant Puffin • 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Nope...no one should ever be penalized for making a bad joke. --Osbus 20:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection from me. - Pureblade | Θ 21:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Same. (^'-')^ Covington 00:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Probation Computerjoe's talk 19:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objections - • The Giant Puffin • 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objections for sure. — Ilyanep (Talk) 20:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No, don't think you did anything offensive. --Osbus 20:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection, nothing uncivil about using common shorthand. - Pureblade | Θ 21:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ditto. (^'-')^ Covington 23:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Member Conduct 

message: I suspended one user,  over various personal attacks and the personal attack made on the CJ page itself . Computerjoe's talk 17:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Ethnopunk|Ethnopunk]] 

message: #Agree until such a time a statement is made privately or on this page to the effect the user has some valid reason for joining. Ian13/talk 17:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Favour of Expulsion 

message: #Agree. It is not to late for a human being to change his ways, no matter how young or old he is. Let's give Ethnopunk an opportunity to show how good he is by offering him an open hand after he has some time to think about his past actions. We can't change the past, but we can change the future by wisely choosing our actions in the present. Let's give him another chance. (^'-')^ Covington 18:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Favour of Timed Suspension 

message: # As a provisionally suspended member I am voting that no action be taken and that my membership be sustained. Can we agree to be civil? Ethnopunk 07:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Favour of No Action 

message: XChrisblackx proposed putting the editor on probation. More details found in the discussion section. If in favour of this, please add your name below. Computerjoe's talk 17:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probation 

message: was expelled by me as he was giving an indefinate username block. If anyone wishes him to be re-admitted please post your objection below. Computerjoe's talk 17:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:JesusWChrist|JesusWChrist]] 

message: Rx StrangeLove had concerns over 's conduct. Personally, I have no interest for action. If anyone objects, please state it. Thanks. Computerjoe's talk 17:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections - • The Giant Puffin • 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Nope...no one should ever be penalized for making a bad joke. --Osbus 20:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection from me. - Pureblade | Θ 21:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Same. (^'-')^ Covington 00:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Probation Computerjoe's talk 19:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Misza13|Misza13]] 

message: There have been concern over my civility, as stated here. Naturally, I don't wish for any action to be taken. If you have any objections, please state it. Computerjoe's talk 17:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections - • The Giant Puffin • 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objections for sure. — Ilyanep (Talk) 20:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No, don't think you did anything offensive. --Osbus 20:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: No objection, nothing uncivil about using common shorthand. - Pureblade | Θ 21:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Ditto. (^'-')^ Covington 23:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:Computerjoe|Computerjoe]] 

message: === Community Justice Barnstar ===
I'm asking for members to create a barnstar for excellent contributions to WP:CJ. Computerjoe's talk 17:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea. Let's wait until we work out the final logo design so that we can place it on the barnstar. (^'-')^ Covington 02:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

text: If we can, I think we should retain control and somehow incoporate Community Justice into the text of the barnstar. --Osbus 20:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we take control, it won't be as widely used. Computerjoe's talk 20:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do we want it to be widely used? The value of the barnstar would go down...we should only give it to users who truly exemplify civility, etc. --Osbus 21:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We want to promote civility to the entire 'pedia; we shouldn't be elitist. I say we retain the authority of changing the text and such like that, but let anyone give it to anyone else that truly deserves it. - Pureblade | Θ 21:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't saying we should be elitist, I was saying we should give it to editors who truly deserve it. --Osbus 21:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Any Wikipedian should be able to give/receive. And really, we can't control it. I saw we say it was made by us, but send it to Wikipedia:Barnstars. Computerjoe's talk 07:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't saying we control who gives them out...I was saying we control the text, etc. When we give them to editors, we should give them to the most deserving. --Osbus 21:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: What do you think about sending it to Wikipedia:Barnstars but making a page listing the criteria for the Civility Barnstar and the receipients of the award. Any user may give it to any other user, but each award giver must add the receipient's list to the award page and provide a link to the award page somewhere on the Civility Barnstar. I hope this addresses everyone's concerns. (^'-')^ Covington 02:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barnstars 

message: I'm asking for members to create a barnstar for excellent contributions to WP:CJ. Computerjoe's talk 17:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea. Let's wait until we work out the final logo design so that we can place it on the barnstar. (^'-')^ Covington 02:47, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Community Justice Barnstar 

message: The Civility Barnstar has been designed, and I'm just asking as to how it should be rolled out. Should we retain control or send it to Wikipedia:Barnstars and give the control to Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign.  Computerjoe's talk 17:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we can, I think we should retain control and somehow incoporate Community Justice into the text of the barnstar. --Osbus 20:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we take control, it won't be as widely used. Computerjoe's talk 20:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do we want it to be widely used? The value of the barnstar would go down...we should only give it to users who truly exemplify civility, etc. --Osbus 21:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We want to promote civility to the entire 'pedia; we shouldn't be elitist. I say we retain the authority of changing the text and such like that, but let anyone give it to anyone else that truly deserves it. - Pureblade | Θ 21:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't saying we should be elitist, I was saying we should give it to editors who truly deserve it. --Osbus 21:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Any Wikipedian should be able to give/receive. And really, we can't control it. I saw we say it was made by us, but send it to Wikipedia:Barnstars. Computerjoe's talk 07:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't saying we control who gives them out...I was saying we control the text, etc. When we give them to editors, we should give them to the most deserving. --Osbus 21:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: What do you think about sending it to Wikipedia:Barnstars but making a page listing the criteria for the Civility Barnstar and the receipients of the award. Any user may give it to any other user, but each award giver must add the receipient's list to the award page and provide a link to the award page somewhere on the Civility Barnstar. I hope this addresses everyone's concerns. (^'-')^ Covington 02:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civility Barnstar 

message: SCZenz has stated he has concerns of the server strain caused by . I am asking for the council's thoughts on phasing it out.
=== Support Phasing Out ===
# Per Computerjoe. We can find other ways to track incivility without straining the server. (Nice call, SCZenz.) (^'-')^ Covington 18:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|tracker}} 

message: # Per Computerjoe. We can find other ways to track incivility without straining the server. (Nice call, SCZenz.) (^'-')^ Covington 18:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Support Phasing Out 

message: #Neutral - Until we can find a better alternative, this may be the best way to track the templates, although it does apparently strain the server - • The Giant Puffin • 18:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abstain/Neutral 

message: For pages currently using  I'll add a category, and keep tracker in place. However, I'll remove tracker from the templates and a category. Computerjoe's talk 19:06, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computerjoe's Suggestion 

message: === Review of , , ,  and  ===
I'm asking for the council's thoughts on the progress of the above templates. You can see the usage of some of these templates at Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Tracker. Computerjoe's talk 17:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to see them used more on actual article talk pages where things get heated, as it can be a good idea to remind all editors of such things. <Strike>I don't know if that's how the templates are intended to be used, though.</strike> — Ilyanep (Talk) 03:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *Quality not quantity, to use a clichèd statement...it seems to me that not many of our members are active in CJ. --Osbus 20:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I agree with Osbus; very few of the members have done anything after joining. - Pureblade | Θ 21:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *And perhaps we need to get a 'program' of sorts going to increase member involvement? — Ilyanep (Talk) 01:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I'm agreeing with you all. Now that we have a member base, we can start doing things as a community. Many people here seem to be excited about Community Justice; we can use that energy to get members more involved. May I suggest a member newsletter similar to that of Esperanza? We need to let members know what we're doing if we are to increase member involvement. (^'-')^ Covington 03:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I like the program idea. It can get members involved, as I too noticed that only a small percentage of our members have done anything since joining. Although I want a large memberbase, I would rather have half our current members if they all did something - • The Giant Puffin • 14:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: ****You know what we should do? We should welcome new users, make them feel a part of our happy community. --Osbus 01:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Also, an intra-organization newsletter would remind our members about Community Justice, and our awards will promote both our goals and or organization. Nice work, Giant Puffin. (^'-')^ Covington 03:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. As much as I love Esperanza, we don't want to be just a copy of what's already done. Nice suggestion, Tijauna Brass. (^'-')^ Covington 02:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont want us to be a copy. I just want us to maybe have a joint program where we can help each other in promoting civility etc. I dont mean we become permenant partners. Just a minor link between us and them. That's all that is needed - • The Giant Puffin • 19:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review 

message: I'm asking for the council's thoughts on the progress of the above templates. You can see the usage of some of these templates at Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Tracker. Computerjoe's talk 17:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to see them used more on actual article talk pages where things get heated, as it can be a good idea to remind all editors of such things. <Strike>I don't know if that's how the templates are intended to be used, though.</strike> — Ilyanep (Talk) 03:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of {{tl|Civil1}}, {{tl|Calm talk}}, {{tl|Civil2}}, {{tl|agf}} and {{tl|agf2}} 

message: I'm asking for a review of CJ on the whole. Please consider factors such as respect, membership and progress on our goals and tasks. Computerjoe's talk 18:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Quality not quantity, to use a clichèd statement...it seems to me that not many of our members are active in CJ. --Osbus 20:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I agree with Osbus; very few of the members have done anything after joining. - Pureblade | Θ 21:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *And perhaps we need to get a 'program' of sorts going to increase member involvement? — Ilyanep (Talk) 01:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I'm agreeing with you all. Now that we have a member base, we can start doing things as a community. Many people here seem to be excited about Community Justice; we can use that energy to get members more involved. May I suggest a member newsletter similar to that of Esperanza? We need to let members know what we're doing if we are to increase member involvement. (^'-')^ Covington 03:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I like the program idea. It can get members involved, as I too noticed that only a small percentage of our members have done anything since joining. Although I want a large memberbase, I would rather have half our current members if they all did something - • The Giant Puffin • 14:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: ****You know what we should do? We should welcome new users, make them feel a part of our happy community. --Osbus 01:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Also, an intra-organization newsletter would remind our members about Community Justice, and our awards will promote both our goals and or organization. Nice work, Giant Puffin. (^'-')^ Covington 03:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. As much as I love Esperanza, we don't want to be just a copy of what's already done. Nice suggestion, Tijauna Brass. (^'-')^ Covington 02:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont want us to be a copy. I just want us to maybe have a joint program where we can help each other in promoting civility etc. I dont mean we become permenant partners. Just a minor link between us and them. That's all that is needed - • The Giant Puffin • 19:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of Community Justice on whole 

message: * Respectable. Excellent growth, excited members. Let's think of something to get the membership even more involved. Great work. (^'-')^ Covington 18:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Quality not quantity, to use a clichèd statement...it seems to me that not many of our members are active in CJ. --Osbus 20:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I agree with Osbus; very few of the members have done anything after joining. - Pureblade | Θ 21:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *And perhaps we need to get a 'program' of sorts going to increase member involvement? — Ilyanep (Talk) 01:00, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I'm agreeing with you all. Now that we have a member base, we can start doing things as a community. Many people here seem to be excited about Community Justice; we can use that energy to get members more involved. May I suggest a member newsletter similar to that of Esperanza? We need to let members know what we're doing if we are to increase member involvement. (^'-')^ Covington 03:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: *I like the program idea. It can get members involved, as I too noticed that only a small percentage of our members have done anything since joining. Although I want a large memberbase, I would rather have half our current members if they all did something - • The Giant Puffin • 14:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

text: ****You know what we should do? We should welcome new users, make them feel a part of our happy community. --Osbus 01:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Membership

message: *I think we have promoted civility well in the community. However I think that, if we are going to promote civility to the extent it is the norm for the vast majority of people, we must take a more active role within the community. Pretty much everyone knows who Esperanza are, but do a lot of people know us? If we are to get our goals across to the bulk of people, we must make ourselves known through templates, assisting people who come to us (or atleast turning them in the right direction) and working with other WP organisations to help each other and promote our goals through their members. This will increase our member base to the extent that it will be a small community in itself. This will, in turn, accelerate our progress more than it has been accelerating by the recent surge in membership. Progress has been good, there's no doubt, but it could be better - • The Giant Puffin • 18:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Also, an intra-organization newsletter would remind our members about Community Justice, and our awards will promote both our goals and or organization. Nice work, Giant Puffin. (^'-')^ Covington 03:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Progress on Goals/Tasks

message: *I like what The Giant Puffin says above, and I agree that we need to find a way to work with other organizations in WP with similar goals. Perhaps a joint program with ESP, or something of the like? — Ilyanep (Talk) 20:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. As much as I love Esperanza, we don't want to be just a copy of what's already done. Nice suggestion, Tijauna Brass. (^'-')^ Covington 02:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont want us to be a copy. I just want us to maybe have a joint program where we can help each other in promoting civility etc. I dont mean we become permenant partners. Just a minor link between us and them. That's all that is needed - • The Giant Puffin • 19:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other

message: === Community Justice barnstar ===
I support its creation, and would give it to all the election staff, for doing such a great job.  You know.  -zappa.jake (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Strongly Suppor It would go well I must admit Mahogany
I too wish to add my support on this. --Siva1979Talk to me 15:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barnstars 

message: I support its creation, and would give it to all the election staff, for doing such a great job.  You know.  -zappa.jake (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Strongly Suppor It would go well I must admit Mahogany
I too wish to add my support on this. --Siva1979Talk to me 15:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Community Justice barnstar 

message: I have thought of a way to replace this. In the current tracker we add a category, and in Civil1 and Civil2 we add categories and remove tracker. Whoola! Computerjoe's talk 18:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work. (^'-')^ Covington 18:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps we should add it as another option for the vote? Computerjoe's talk 18:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good ideas - • The Giant Puffin • 18:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. Great way to keep the tracker's functionality while dropping the actual original template. Well done. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 07:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|tracker}} 

message: === Review of , , ,  and  ===
=== Review of Community Justice on whole ===
Not looking to be a gadfly, but in what way is the council planning on distinguishing CJ from Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign and Wikipedia:Esperanza? Both have similar goals — what unfulfilled role is CJ taking up? There's been some action, in creating a few templates, but the "promoting civility" agenda doesn't seem to have done much beyond that at the time. What is CJ looking forward to in terms of future goals? Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 23:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We specialise in civility. Computerjoe's talk 06:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly the issue — I don't think that could be any more vague. Specific goals, some of which have started to form, will direct efforts much more effectively than "let's promote civility." We've got numbers, we've got skilled leaders, we've got a good overarching theme, we've got organization... now what? Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 07:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I was hoping we would take a more active role in things in terms of promoting civility, getting rid of people who are constantly uncivil etc. As to whether the rest of the group wants this, I dont know. I feel sittng back, creating templates, and working with no organisations on wikipedia is not much good - • The Giant Puffin • 19:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. We've already defined our goals but how we are going to fullfill them is vague. --Osbus 21:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but are there any ideas of what could be done? Ian13/talk 19:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

text: It was a typo. Computerjoe's talk 09:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see...that makes more sense :P — Ilyanep (Talk) 14:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did think 28th was a bit long, a typo explains it - • The Giant Puffin • 16:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review 

message: Not looking to be a gadfly, but in what way is the council planning on distinguishing CJ from Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign and Wikipedia:Esperanza? Both have similar goals — what unfulfilled role is CJ taking up? There's been some action, in creating a few templates, but the "promoting civility" agenda doesn't seem to have done much beyond that at the time. What is CJ looking forward to in terms of future goals? Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 23:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We specialise in civility. Computerjoe's talk 06:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's exactly the issue — I don't think that could be any more vague. Specific goals, some of which have started to form, will direct efforts much more effectively than "let's promote civility." We've got numbers, we've got skilled leaders, we've got a good overarching theme, we've got organization... now what? Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 07:53, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I was hoping we would take a more active role in things in terms of promoting civility, getting rid of people who are constantly uncivil etc. As to whether the rest of the group wants this, I dont know. I feel sittng back, creating templates, and working with no organisations on wikipedia is not much good - • The Giant Puffin • 19:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. We've already defined our goals but how we are going to fullfill them is vague. --Osbus 21:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but are there any ideas of what could be done? Ian13/talk 19:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of Community Justice on whole 

message: Ending on Sunday May 28th? Isn't that a little long, especially considering that the other one was about 4 days long? It just sort of becomes an extended talk page in a sense. Any thoughts? — Ilyanep (Talk) 22:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a typo. Computerjoe's talk 09:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see...that makes more sense :P — Ilyanep (Talk) 14:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did think 28th was a bit long, a typo explains it - • The Giant Puffin • 16:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Review of the Meeting