CZ:Professionalism: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger
imported>Larry Sanger
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:


The importance of professionalism (again, professional ''behavior'') to the success of this project is such that uncivil and disruptive behavior can quickly result in banning.  See [[Citizendium Pilot:Constabulary Blocking Procedures|Constabulary Blocking Procedures]].  This page does not, however, lay out the standards and procedures for banning, but acts as a general guide to civil behavior for the use of contributors.
The importance of professionalism (again, professional ''behavior'') to the success of this project is such that uncivil and disruptive behavior can quickly result in banning.  See [[Citizendium Pilot:Constabulary Blocking Procedures|Constabulary Blocking Procedures]].  This page does not, however, lay out the standards and procedures for banning, but acts as a general guide to civil behavior for the use of contributors.
'''Note:''' we are discussing, here, only professional standards of civil behavior.  You don't have to be a professional to act professionally.


== Professionalism--what is it? ==
== Professionalism--what is it? ==

Revision as of 19:52, 9 March 2007

The Citizendium differs significantly from other online communities in its commitment to professionalism--that is, professional behavior--and low tolerance for incivility and disruption. It is essential, for there to be efficient content production and motivated contributors, that we all treat each other "professionally" and each other's work respectfully. The vast majority of contributors to the Citizendium already know what is understood by "professionalism" and "collegiality"; that understanding is what is articulated here.

The importance of professionalism (again, professional behavior) to the success of this project is such that uncivil and disruptive behavior can quickly result in banning. See Constabulary Blocking Procedures. This page does not, however, lay out the standards and procedures for banning, but acts as a general guide to civil behavior for the use of contributors.

Note: we are discussing, here, only professional standards of civil behavior. You don't have to be a professional to act professionally.

Professionalism--what is it?

To be drafted.

Why professional behavior is so important

Many people are used to Internet forums in which offense is regularly dished out, expected, and returned in kind. It is quite unusual for a fairly open and active Internet community, like this one, to promote standards of professional behavior.

But professionalism is particularly important for this project, for several reasons. We can effectively collaborate only if we can regard each other as, more or less, equals. Moreover, we are volunteers, so we simply won't spend a lot of time on a project if it involves taking a lot of abuse. Many of us have a particularly low tolerance for nonsense; we have many better things to do with our time, and if we have to spend the time we have devoted to this project to sorting out disputes, we will not want to participate at all.

Use the talk page

A great many problems could be avoided if people were to use the "talk" pages--i.e., the pages you arrive at by pressing the "discussion" tab--before making any potentially controversial changes. Polite communication is a large part of professionalism.

What behaviors are unprofessional?

So, what behaviors are unprofessional?

There are some obvious cases. Consider some "Offenses which will result in an immediate ban" in our Constabulary Blocking Procedures:

  • Extremely offensive insults or personal attacks; direct and harsh attacks on the moral character, or personal or professional credibility, of a project member; or any application of particularly crude and vulgar epithets ("four letter words") to project members. It does not matter whether these attacks are made using Citizendium resources or other resources.
  • Threats, either of physical harm or of other egregious aggression, whether against an individual or a group of individuals.

Other examples are "Offenses which will result in a warning first, then a ban":

  • Insults or personal attacks, on talk pages or other open forums, that are relatively mild, but which are still objectionable on grounds that they aggressively impugn the moral character, or personal or professional credibility, of a project member. It does not matter whether these attacks are made using Citizendium resources or other resources.
  • Disrespectful characterization of others' work on talk pages or other open forums. Note, mere criticism of a position or a forceful reply does not necessarily qualify as disrespectful; objectionable language has an implication of personal criticism, or can be reasonably taken to have such an implication.

Reversion and deletion as unprofessional behaviors

To "revert" a page is simply to undo all the edits that someone else has made, without warning or explanation. This is unprofessional because it demonstrates contempt for the person. If I spend ten minutes working on a page, and you simply undo my changes, you render my time spent pointless--which is tantamount to the claim that I spend significant time doing pointless things, and that your judgment is so superior to mine that you need not offer an explanation. Therefore, if you're tempted simply to revert what someone else has done, discussion on the talk page is warranted. Indeed, sometimes the polite way is to let the other person undo his or her own work, once a mistake is pointed out.

Of course, vandalism and abuse can be instantly reverted (without explanation) by anyone.

If you find yourself the "victim" of an unexplained reversion, the best way forward is not to revert back, but to e-mail constables@citizendium.org--and let the constables do it. This will not only solve the problem, it will help ensure that the offending behavior is not repeated.

Wikipedians note: needless to say, the Wikipedia "three revert rule" is not in effect here.

Similarly, deletion of others' work without explanation is clearly unprofessional, and deletion of more than 50 words can result in a warning, followed by a ban. Again, for you to delete, without a careful explanation, a paragraph--or article--that I have carefully crafted is essentially to assert that my work was wholly worthless, and that your judgment is so much more refined than mine that I am not owed an explanation. Your aggressive act places me into a defensive and hurt posture.

That just isn't professional behavior--which you don't have to be a professional to emulate.

How to respond to unprofessional behavior

The victims of rudeness or personal attacks do not have to tolerate this behavior. This is not behavior we would tolerate from our fellows in a face-to-face situation; we will not tolerate it on the Citizendium, either. We wish to nip incivility in the bud, before it escalates. Therefore, it is essential that, rather than worsening the situation, you report a difficult user, or problematic action, to the constabulary (a mail to constables@citizendium.org will do the trick). Generally, uncivil remarks may be replaced with the {{civil}} template, which reads:

Text here was removed by the Constabulary on grounds of civility. (The author may replace this template with an edited version of the original remarks.)

If you must respond to poor behavior, please do so professionally. Please do not "take the law into your own hands" by criticizing others for their poor behavior. Complaints, even perfectly justifiable complaints, may be replaced with the {{nocomplaints}} template, which reads:

A comment here was deleted by The Constabulary on grounds of making complaints about fellow Citizens. If you have a complaint about the behavior of another Citizen, e-mail constables@citizendium.org. It is contrary to Citizendium policy to air your complaints on the wiki. See also CZ:Professionalism.

How to criticize work without being rude

Some might balk at the guidelines here, saying that it is unreasonable to ask people to treat really bad work respectfully. Won't justifiable criticism of bad work necessarily sound rude?

Not necessarily. It is possible to explain what is wrong with appallingly bad text in strictly objective terms. That is, after all, what professionals do. There is no particular reason to characterize a position as "nonsense" or "ill-informed"--that is disrespectful. It is much preferable to couch criticisms in a way that will not provoke a defensive reaction, such as "I have to disagree" or "I've never heard that claim before" or "With respect, I don't think you will find any X-ologists agreeing with you."