Bitcoin Wiki talk:Editing privileges - Revision history

Belcher: /* Rules */ Elaborated rule 2

2020-03-29T13:43:11Z

Rules: Elaborated rule 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:43, 29 March 2020
Line 9:		Line 9:
	== Rules ==		== Rules ==
	# Articles here will likely be edited by other people. Try not to take it personally.		# Articles here will likely be edited by other people. Try not to take it personally.
	# Avoid listing sites or services which make their own income (e.g. exchanges, marketplaces, hardware wallet manufacturers etc). At some point, it is likely that commercial listings will be globally deleted.		# Avoid listing sites or services which make their own income (e.g. exchanges, marketplaces, hardware wallet manufacturers etc). At some point, it is likely that commercial listings will be globally deleted. You can talk about the idea of certain products (e.g. hardware wallets exist and are useful in XYZ circumstances) but not list specific brands.
	# Avoid altcoins and especially scamcoins when possible, or confine discussion of these to their own pages (e.g. comparison of altcoins). The bitcoin wiki is a space for bitcoin.		# Avoid altcoins and especially scamcoins when possible, or confine discussion of these to their own pages (e.g. comparison of altcoins). The bitcoin wiki is a space for bitcoin.
	# Do not engage in edit wars: use the talk page to find consensus, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring		# Do not engage in edit wars: use the talk page to find consensus, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring

Belcher: /* Comments */ added summary of my short discussion with luke-jr on irc

2017-10-01T21:24:48Z

Comments: added summary of my short discussion with luke-jr on irc

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:24, 1 October 2017
Line 42:		Line 42:
	* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
	** I agree with your edits except I strongly think the principles should be on the same page as the rules. Principles show the intent of what we're trying to achieve with the wiki and new editors should definitely read them. Rules will always be mundane stuff like "dont do this", "dont do that" they provide the ''how'', but principles provide the ''why''. Specific rules can never describe every situation so the mission statement of the wiki needs to be well known too. I'm happy to talk more about this since I feel quite strongly. A smaller issue is the distinction between altcoin and scamcoin. "Scamcoin" might help create the impression that an "altcoin" isn't a scam. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 23:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		** I agree with your edits except I strongly think the principles should be on the same page as the rules. Principles show the intent of what we're trying to achieve with the wiki and new editors should definitely read them. Rules will always be mundane stuff like "dont do this", "dont do that" they provide the ''how'', but principles provide the ''why''. Specific rules can never describe every situation so the mission statement of the wiki needs to be well known too. I'm happy to talk more about this since I feel quite strongly. A smaller issue is the distinction between altcoin and scamcoin. "Scamcoin" might help create the impression that an "altcoin" isn't a scam. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 23:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

			I had some discussion about this with luke-jr on the IRC channel. Here are his thoughts (If I may take the liberty of summarizing someone else's thoughts here). "the altcoin rule needs clarification that tech potentially useful for Bitcoin in the future (or even just plain research, useful or not) is ok", I agree with this because it follows from the principle about advancing the aims of bitcoin, new altcoin tech is always interesting and could directly or indirectly help bitcoin. I'd add that we should more talk about the technology rather than altcoin names, so we talk about ring signatures and cryptonote rather then Monero. "The principles and aims of bitcoin is fundamentally undefined", which is true but that doesn't matter for a principle. The principles are there to help us go forward if the rules ever don't cover a specific situation, note that wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_bureaucracy does not have rules], they also prefer this approach by everyone mostly-agreeing on general principles. Next, luke-jr says that "the "owners" of the wiki are are theymos, warren, and myself(luke-jr)" so we should correct that. Luke also cautions against removing pages like [[Trade]], and certainly we should get this page read by almost everyone who contributes to the wiki. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 21:24, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Belcher: /* Comments */ added my comments to midnightmagic's

2017-09-21T23:38:00Z

Comments: added my comments to midnightmagic's

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:38, 21 September 2017
Line 41:		Line 41:
	Sounds good to me, I think it is good for the wiki to have such explicit rules and goals. Ruling out linkdumps to paid services also makes sense, it puts unreasonable burden on wiki moderators to vet them - [[User:Wumpus\|Wumpus]] ([[User talk:Wumpus\|talk]]) 18:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		Sounds good to me, I think it is good for the wiki to have such explicit rules and goals. Ruling out linkdumps to paid services also makes sense, it puts unreasonable burden on wiki moderators to vet them - [[User:Wumpus\|Wumpus]] ([[User talk:Wumpus\|talk]]) 18:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
	* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
			** I agree with your edits except I strongly think the principles should be on the same page as the rules. Principles show the intent of what we're trying to achieve with the wiki and new editors should definitely read them. Rules will always be mundane stuff like "dont do this", "dont do that" they provide the ''how'', but principles provide the ''why''. Specific rules can never describe every situation so the mission statement of the wiki needs to be well known too. I'm happy to talk more about this since I feel quite strongly. A smaller issue is the distinction between altcoin and scamcoin. "Scamcoin" might help create the impression that an "altcoin" isn't a scam. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 23:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Midnightmagic: -- as per note in comments section

2017-09-21T23:10:43Z

-- as per note in comments section

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:10, 21 September 2017
Line 8:		Line 8:

	== Rules ==		== Rules ==
	# ~~Try not to take personal ownership over an article, if it's~~ here it will likely be edited. ~~The original author has no more rights than any other editor~~.		# Articles here will likely be edited by other people. Try not to take it personally.
	# Avoid listing sites or services which make their own income (e.g. exchanges, marketplaces, hardware wallet manufacturers etc).		# Avoid listing sites or services which make their own income (e.g. exchanges, marketplaces, hardware wallet manufacturers etc). At some point, it is likely that commercial listings will be globally deleted.
	# ~~Altcoins are to be avoided if~~ possible, or ~~confined~~ to their own pages (e.g. comparison of altcoins). The bitcoin wiki is a space for bitcoin ~~maximalism~~.		# Avoid altcoins and especially scamcoins when possible, or confine discussion of these to their own pages (e.g. comparison of altcoins). The bitcoin wiki is a space for bitcoin.
	# ~~Try~~ not to engage in edit wars, use the talk page ~~instead~~, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring		# Do not engage in edit wars: use the talk page to find consensus, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring

	== Principles ==		== Principles ==
	# The wiki is for advancing the principles and aims of bitcoin. Anything that helps bitcoin is ~~allowed, anything that harms bitcoin is not allowed~~.		# The wiki is for advancing the principles and aims of bitcoin. Anything that helps bitcoin is specifically on-topic for this wiki.
	# The wiki is run by volunteers who are bitcoin enthusiasts.		# The wiki is run by volunteers who are bitcoin enthusiasts.
	# Wikis work well when as many people as possible are encouraged to get involved and can easily edit the pages, subject to constraints of spammers and vandals.		# Wikis work well when as many people as possible are encouraged to get involved and can easily edit the pages, subject to constraints of spammers and vandals.
Line 20:		Line 20:

	== Discussion ==		== Discussion ==
	# The wiki seems to be funded and hosted by theymos and cobra, who have shown to be very pro-bitcoin historically. Although this is centralization it doesn't have to require trust. If the owners ever became evil then the contributors can easily mirror the site to another server and carry on editing.		* The wiki seems to be funded and hosted by theymos and cobra, who have shown to be very pro-bitcoin historically. Although this is centralization it doesn't have to require trust. If the owners ever became evil then the contributors can easily mirror the site to another server and carry on editing.
	# There's no mechanism for enforcing these rules except actions by editors, so for any system of rules to work it has to reach broad agreement from most of us.		** In any event they have never exercised any control over the contents of this wiki. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
	# Regarding businesses which make their own income. We wiki editors are not at all against bitcoin businesses, but we just want to use our volunteer resources efficiently. Once one site is mentioned all the others will naturally want to be mentioned too. As this wiki is run by volunteers we are not able to curate this. Businesses with an income can spend resources on search engine optimization (SEO). That is how most customers find the services they want anyway, via SFTW not looking at long unsorted lists on the bitcoin wiki. The technology behind a search engine already exists and can do a much better job than us here. Specific names could still be linked if it would greatly improve the article as an example (e.g. hold your own private keys because if a MtGox situation happen again you wont lose your money).		* There's no mechanism for enforcing these rules except actions by editors, so for any system of rules to work it has to reach broad agreement from most of us.
	# The bitcoin wiki is naturally a place for bitcoin ~~maximalism~~. Altcoins can create and maintain their own separate wiki and that's perfectly fine, but bitcoin wiki is not the place for that~~. Especially~~ since almost all ~~the time~~ altcoin enthusiasts feel they must attack and spread FUD in an effort to show their own altcoin in a better light. This just wastes volunteer time so the best solution is to ban them outright.		* Regarding businesses which make their own income. We wiki editors are not at all against bitcoin businesses, but we just want to use our volunteer resources efficiently. Once one site is mentioned all the others will naturally want to be mentioned too. As this wiki is run by volunteers we are not able to curate this. Businesses with an income can spend resources on search engine optimization (SEO). That is how most customers find the services they want anyway, via SFTW not looking at long unsorted lists on the bitcoin wiki. The technology behind a search engine already exists and can do a much better job than us here. Specific names could still be linked if it would greatly improve the article as an example (e.g. hold your own private keys because if a MtGox situation happen again you wont lose your money).
	# The wiki is sometimes similar in content to bitcoin.org but there can be roles for both. The wiki is much more easily and readily available to edit, so the wiki might be aimed at more general articles and tutorials while bitcoin.org will probably end up being more about authoritative detailed technical articles.		** It is very likely that all commercial listings on this wiki will be removed in the near future. The original point of listing businesses in here was to promote the broad acceptance of Bitcoin and highlight those businesses who had taken the first step. Virtually no new reputable businesses list here anymore. Mostly it's just SEO scum coming in here now, and the level of scum and thievery represented in here is to my view intolerable. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
	# The scalability drama was made worse by the historical overemphasis on free on-chain transactions, the bitcoin wiki was full of this misinformation.		* The bitcoin wiki is naturally a place for bitcoin—and specifically bitcoin. Altcoins can create and maintain their own separate wiki and that's perfectly fine, but bitcoin wiki is not the place for that, especially since almost all altcoin enthusiasts feel they must attack and spread FUD in an effort to show their own altcoin in a better light. This just wastes volunteer time so the best solution is to ban them outright.
			* The wiki is sometimes similar in content to bitcoin.org but there can be roles for both. The wiki is much more easily and readily available to edit, so the wiki might be aimed at more general articles and tutorials while bitcoin.org will probably end up being more about authoritative detailed technical articles.
			** They're separate efforts entirely. In some ways it's not really important what they put on their pages. In my view the bitcoin wiki "is what it is". Here random developers can correct pages themselves without pushing through PRs in a semi-formal process. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
			* The scalability drama was made worse by the historical overemphasis on free on-chain transactions, the bitcoin wiki was full of this misinformation.
			** We should kill such references to free transactions except as an historical note. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

	== Comments ==		== Comments ==
Line 36:		Line 40:

	Sounds good to me, I think it is good for the wiki to have such explicit rules and goals. Ruling out linkdumps to paid services also makes sense, it puts unreasonable burden on wiki moderators to vet them - [[User:Wumpus\|Wumpus]] ([[User talk:Wumpus\|talk]]) 18:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		Sounds good to me, I think it is good for the wiki to have such explicit rules and goals. Ruling out linkdumps to paid services also makes sense, it puts unreasonable burden on wiki moderators to vet them - [[User:Wumpus\|Wumpus]] ([[User talk:Wumpus\|talk]]) 18:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
			* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Belcher: added a discussion point about enforcing these rules

2017-09-21T18:55:40Z

added a discussion point about enforcing these rules

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:55, 21 September 2017
Line 21:		Line 21:
	== Discussion ==		== Discussion ==
	# The wiki seems to be funded and hosted by theymos and cobra, who have shown to be very pro-bitcoin historically. Although this is centralization it doesn't have to require trust. If the owners ever became evil then the contributors can easily mirror the site to another server and carry on editing.		# The wiki seems to be funded and hosted by theymos and cobra, who have shown to be very pro-bitcoin historically. Although this is centralization it doesn't have to require trust. If the owners ever became evil then the contributors can easily mirror the site to another server and carry on editing.
	# Regarding ~~business~~ which make their own income. We wiki editors are not at all against bitcoin businesses, but we just want to use our volunteer resources efficiently. Once one site is mentioned all the others will naturally want to be mentioned too. As this wiki is run by volunteers we are not able to curate this. Businesses with an income can spend resources on search engine optimization (SEO). That is how most customers find the services they want anyway, via SFTW not looking at long unsorted lists on the bitcoin wiki. The technology behind a search engine already exists and can do a much better job than us here. Specific names could still be linked if it would greatly improve the article as an example (e.g. hold your own private keys because if a MtGox situation happen again you wont lose your money).		# There's no mechanism for enforcing these rules except actions by editors, so for any system of rules to work it has to reach broad agreement from most of us.
			# Regarding businesses which make their own income. We wiki editors are not at all against bitcoin businesses, but we just want to use our volunteer resources efficiently. Once one site is mentioned all the others will naturally want to be mentioned too. As this wiki is run by volunteers we are not able to curate this. Businesses with an income can spend resources on search engine optimization (SEO). That is how most customers find the services they want anyway, via SFTW not looking at long unsorted lists on the bitcoin wiki. The technology behind a search engine already exists and can do a much better job than us here. Specific names could still be linked if it would greatly improve the article as an example (e.g. hold your own private keys because if a MtGox situation happen again you wont lose your money).
	# The bitcoin wiki is naturally a place for bitcoin maximalism. Altcoins can create and maintain their own separate wiki and that's perfectly fine, but bitcoin wiki is not the place for that. Especially since almost all the time altcoin enthusiasts feel they must attack and spread FUD in an effort to show their own altcoin in a better light. This just wastes volunteer time so the best solution is to ban them outright.		# The bitcoin wiki is naturally a place for bitcoin maximalism. Altcoins can create and maintain their own separate wiki and that's perfectly fine, but bitcoin wiki is not the place for that. Especially since almost all the time altcoin enthusiasts feel they must attack and spread FUD in an effort to show their own altcoin in a better light. This just wastes volunteer time so the best solution is to ban them outright.
	# The wiki is sometimes similar in content to bitcoin.org but there can be roles for both. The wiki is much more easily and readily available to edit, so the wiki might be aimed at more general articles and tutorials while bitcoin.org will probably end up being more about authoritative detailed technical articles.		# The wiki is sometimes similar in content to bitcoin.org but there can be roles for both. The wiki is much more easily and readily available to edit, so the wiki might be aimed at more general articles and tutorials while bitcoin.org will probably end up being more about authoritative detailed technical articles.

Wumpus at 18:44, 21 September 2017

2017-09-21T18:44:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:44, 21 September 2017
Line 33:		Line 33:

	[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] 14:59 21 September 2017 (GMT)		[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] 14:59 21 September 2017 (GMT)

			Sounds good to me, I think it is good for the wiki to have such explicit rules and goals. Ruling out linkdumps to paid services also makes sense, it puts unreasonable burden on wiki moderators to vet them - [[User:Wumpus\|Wumpus]] ([[User talk:Wumpus\|talk]]) 18:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Belcher: /* Comments */ reword

2017-09-21T14:15:38Z

Comments: reword

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:15, 21 September 2017
Line 28:		Line 28:
	== Comments ==		== Comments ==

	I wrote this page and am happy to take on board comments.		I wrote this page and am happy to take on board comments. I'm aiming to help us use our volunteer resources more efficiently.

	Soon I intend to write some articles about altcoins, the network effect and other such things. I've had enough tedious discussions with ~~altcoins~~ in real life and it would be good to squash those on the bitcoin wiki. Also the rules should be a step towards cleaning up the big lists of bitcoin businesses which really should just focus on SEO instead. Also all those business owners end up asking for editing rights to add themselves, and its a waste of volunteers time adding them.		Soon I intend to write some articles about altcoins, the network effect and other such things. I've had enough tedious discussions with altcoiners in real life and it would be good to squash those on the bitcoin wiki. Also the rules should be a step towards cleaning up the big lists of bitcoin businesses which really should just focus on SEO instead. Also all those business owners end up asking for editing rights to add themselves, and its a waste of volunteers time adding them.

	[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] 14:59 21 September 2017 (GMT)		[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] 14:59 21 September 2017 (GMT)

Belcher: wrote suggestion for rules and opened for discussion

2017-09-21T14:10:10Z

wrote suggestion for rules and opened for discussion

New page

I suggest a codification of the rules of the wiki.

We who are prolific editors should discuss these rules amongst ourselves and make sure we agree with them. Once we all agree the rules should become official. We should try to make sure everyone has seen the rules before they come into effect. Once you read these rules please add your own comments to the comments section even if its just to say ''"I've read the page and will think about it more before saying anything"''.

Written rules will be useful to ask new editors to read them, also if someone breaks a rule we can say "see rule 2)".

The rule page is split into rules, principles and discussion. Principles talks about the underlying motivations, rules are concrete lists of what you can and cant do, discussion is a longer list of why the rules are the way they are.

== Rules ==
# Try not to take personal ownership over an article, if it's here it will likely be edited. The original author has no more rights than any other editor.
# Avoid listing sites or services which make their own income (e.g. exchanges, marketplaces, hardware wallet manufacturers etc).
# Altcoins are to be avoided if possible, or confined to their own pages (e.g. comparison of altcoins). The bitcoin wiki is a space for bitcoin maximalism.
# Try not to engage in edit wars, use the talk page instead, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring

== Principles ==
# The wiki is for advancing the principles and aims of bitcoin. Anything that helps bitcoin is allowed, anything that harms bitcoin is not allowed.
# The wiki is run by volunteers who are bitcoin enthusiasts.
# Wikis work well when as many people as possible are encouraged to get involved and can easily edit the pages, subject to constraints of spammers and vandals.
# These rules were created by discussion amongst bitcoin enthusiasts and wiki contributors. The rules follow from these principles.

== Discussion ==
# The wiki seems to be funded and hosted by theymos and cobra, who have shown to be very pro-bitcoin historically. Although this is centralization it doesn't have to require trust. If the owners ever became evil then the contributors can easily mirror the site to another server and carry on editing.
# Regarding business which make their own income. We wiki editors are not at all against bitcoin businesses, but we just want to use our volunteer resources efficiently. Once one site is mentioned all the others will naturally want to be mentioned too. As this wiki is run by volunteers we are not able to curate this. Businesses with an income can spend resources on search engine optimization (SEO). That is how most customers find the services they want anyway, via SFTW not looking at long unsorted lists on the bitcoin wiki. The technology behind a search engine already exists and can do a much better job than us here. Specific names could still be linked if it would greatly improve the article as an example (e.g. hold your own private keys because if a MtGox situation happen again you wont lose your money).
# The bitcoin wiki is naturally a place for bitcoin maximalism. Altcoins can create and maintain their own separate wiki and that's perfectly fine, but bitcoin wiki is not the place for that. Especially since almost all the time altcoin enthusiasts feel they must attack and spread FUD in an effort to show their own altcoin in a better light. This just wastes volunteer time so the best solution is to ban them outright.
# The wiki is sometimes similar in content to bitcoin.org but there can be roles for both. The wiki is much more easily and readily available to edit, so the wiki might be aimed at more general articles and tutorials while bitcoin.org will probably end up being more about authoritative detailed technical articles.
# The scalability drama was made worse by the historical overemphasis on free on-chain transactions, the bitcoin wiki was full of this misinformation.

== Comments ==

I wrote this page and am happy to take on board comments.

Soon I intend to write some articles about altcoins, the network effect and other such things. I've had enough tedious discussions with altcoins in real life and it would be good to squash those on the bitcoin wiki. Also the rules should be a step towards cleaning up the big lists of bitcoin businesses which really should just focus on SEO instead. Also all those business owners end up asking for editing rights to add themselves, and its a waste of volunteers time adding them.

[[User:Belcher|Belcher]] 14:59 21 September 2017 (GMT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:24, 1 October 2017
Line 42:		Line 42:
	* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
	** I agree with your edits except I strongly think the principles should be on the same page as the rules. Principles show the intent of what we're trying to achieve with the wiki and new editors should definitely read them. Rules will always be mundane stuff like "dont do this", "dont do that" they provide the ''how'', but principles provide the ''why''. Specific rules can never describe every situation so the mission statement of the wiki needs to be well known too. I'm happy to talk more about this since I feel quite strongly. A smaller issue is the distinction between altcoin and scamcoin. "Scamcoin" might help create the impression that an "altcoin" isn't a scam. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 23:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		** I agree with your edits except I strongly think the principles should be on the same page as the rules. Principles show the intent of what we're trying to achieve with the wiki and new editors should definitely read them. Rules will always be mundane stuff like "dont do this", "dont do that" they provide the ''how'', but principles provide the ''why''. Specific rules can never describe every situation so the mission statement of the wiki needs to be well known too. I'm happy to talk more about this since I feel quite strongly. A smaller issue is the distinction between altcoin and scamcoin. "Scamcoin" might help create the impression that an "altcoin" isn't a scam. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 23:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

			I had some discussion about this with luke-jr on the IRC channel. Here are his thoughts (If I may take the liberty of summarizing someone else's thoughts here). "the altcoin rule needs clarification that tech potentially useful for Bitcoin in the future (or even just plain research, useful or not) is ok", I agree with this because it follows from the principle about advancing the aims of bitcoin, new altcoin tech is always interesting and could directly or indirectly help bitcoin. I'd add that we should more talk about the technology rather than altcoin names, so we talk about ring signatures and cryptonote rather then Monero. "The principles and aims of bitcoin is fundamentally undefined", which is true but that doesn't matter for a principle. The principles are there to help us go forward if the rules ever don't cover a specific situation, note that wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_bureaucracy does not have rules], they also prefer this approach by everyone mostly-agreeing on general principles. Next, luke-jr says that "the "owners" of the wiki are are theymos, warren, and myself(luke-jr)" so we should correct that. Luke also cautions against removing pages like [[Trade]], and certainly we should get this page read by almost everyone who contributes to the wiki. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 21:24, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:38, 21 September 2017
Line 41:		Line 41:
	Sounds good to me, I think it is good for the wiki to have such explicit rules and goals. Ruling out linkdumps to paid services also makes sense, it puts unreasonable burden on wiki moderators to vet them - [[User:Wumpus\|Wumpus]] ([[User talk:Wumpus\|talk]]) 18:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		Sounds good to me, I think it is good for the wiki to have such explicit rules and goals. Ruling out linkdumps to paid services also makes sense, it puts unreasonable burden on wiki moderators to vet them - [[User:Wumpus\|Wumpus]] ([[User talk:Wumpus\|talk]]) 18:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
	* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)		* I agree. I've modified the nature of the discussion section to use the normal method as on Wikipedia. I've changed the wording a bit in the rules. Comments appreciated. I've removed the term maximalist because it is used as a denigration form by the paid astroturfers. Please when you comment, as wumpus has done, sign your comments and statements in the discussion section so we know their origins. In my opinion the principles don't need to be on the same page as the rules. This discussion page is enough to explain how we arrived at the current state. [[User:Midnightmagic\|Midnightmagic]] ([[User talk:Midnightmagic\|talk]]) 23:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
			** I agree with your edits except I strongly think the principles should be on the same page as the rules. Principles show the intent of what we're trying to achieve with the wiki and new editors should definitely read them. Rules will always be mundane stuff like "dont do this", "dont do that" they provide the ''how'', but principles provide the ''why''. Specific rules can never describe every situation so the mission statement of the wiki needs to be well known too. I'm happy to talk more about this since I feel quite strongly. A smaller issue is the distinction between altcoin and scamcoin. "Scamcoin" might help create the impression that an "altcoin" isn't a scam. [[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 23:38, 21 September 2017 (UTC)