Forum:DBAD: do we really need it?

Forums: Yew Grove > DBAD: do we really need it?

See also: Forum:Change DBAN to DBAD

Hi. This thread is questioning whether the essay don't be a dick, aka DBAD, is really necessary.

The first reason that it seems unnecessary is because it is very hard to find a situation in which it can be used without causing trouble. Use it on a vandal and they will more then likely flame you or ignore it. Use to to a user who has been here a while, and they will likely ignore it or dispute whether they are actually being a dick. I cannot think of a situation in which it would be helpful to link someone to this essay, and thus, cannot think of a reason why it should exist. If you have one that I'm missing please fill me in on it.

Also, can the same thing not be said in your own words? We don't need an essay. In-fact, I have never been linked to DBAD nor seen anyone else linked to it. Now, thats not to say it doesn't happen, but its safe to assume its rather rare. A

Which leads to the possibility that people are ignoring this essay. There are plenty of people who act like dicks often, and yet, as I have said I have never seen this essay apart from a thread discussing it. If it is being ignored, doesn't that mean it is doing no good for the wiki?

Now, people may argue its doing no bad, and if no one is seeing it, why must we remove it? However, I find dick to be at the very least rather immature, possibly worse. Furthermore, do we just leave pages around that are doing no good? No, we delete them.

Lastly, "dick" is not clearly defined. I always assumed that the policy literally referred to a certain masculine organ, though other users did not take it this way. If I was linked to that policy, I would take it that the person was calling me my definition of a dick, rather then theirs. This is something that I would take offense at, and, as I said earlier, it would cause only trouble for both of us. I'm sure not every user shares my definition or even thinks of that, but if the essay is going to continue to exist, it must be defined in a clearer way.

Lastly, a certain user recently was complaining about me "using a plethora of internet slang and abbreviations clearly inappropriate for a serious discussion". Please, if any of you have a problem with this, aether correct any of these problems yourself or tell me and I will do it. Thanks. 3rd age farcaster 00:53, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Comment - It's just an essay for users to read if they want to. The page at the top says "This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more RuneScape Wiki contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it." So it really doesn't cause any problems to keep it how it is.

1. REDIRECT User:TyA/sig 01:04, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

This essay can provide new advice that can be useful to users, and since it's not a policy it's simply giving you advice. It really shouldn't be cited in an argument since it's simply an essay.

1. REDIRECT User:TyA/sig 01:54, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support Removal - The problem here is that the essay will only be read by the kind of users who read these essays, and I can't imagine a person who needs to have this essay cited to them will care enough to read it. In addition, it can only add fire to a flame that is already burning and has zero possibility of ever making the situation any better than it was before the essay was cited. We don't need an essay telling users not to be rude, mean, jerks, noobs, whatever you call it. Use common sence and treat others the way you think is right, don't rely on a poorly written essay. I would write more, but I need to finish some things before going to bed. User:Stelercus/Signature 01:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

The vast majority of the opposition has been doing so per Halo's comments, though Halo did not address any of the reasons for the deletion in the proposal. The problem here is not an issue of our user base having heard the word used in a sentence before, it's the uselessness of the essay and the fact that we are using a word that is considered vulgar in something supported by the community. Unlike the Konami code argument, there is a completely valid reason to say that having an essay that says such things is unprofessional (and yes, I am saying that Wikipedia is unprofessional by having that essay). Even if it does work along side our policies, as Liquid said, is it the best way to word it? Seeing as how I would think lowly of an unfamiliar organization that would use such crass words, I remain convinced the answer is no. To expand on my argument that the essay is useless, I can't see how reading the essay would benefit any of our users (or anyone at all, for that matter). You read an essay that tells you not to be intentionally difficult. What useful information are you supposed to take from that? I ask this in the most sincere way possible: who is supposed to or why would someone benefit from reading this essay? User:Stelercus/Signature 19:12, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support Removal - RS:UTP cover's this very well, and I do not like the use of profanities in a policy's essay's name (I liked it when it was DBAN). Evil1888 ^{Talk A's L} 01:31, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support Removal - Per above, the UTP covers it. Also, like Steler said, it is more often fuel for the fire than something that calms it down.

1. REDIRECT User:C886553/sig 01:32, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support removal - I was already against the idea of changing the essay's name, and this is a vague policy.  Lil cloud 9 ^Talk 01:48, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Removal - I believe that it carries value that our other policies don't. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 01:52, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Elaborate pl0x.

1. REDIRECT User:C886553/sig 01:53, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose removal - This is an essay, which means that it exemplifies the policies and clears up some of the legal jargon found the actual policy, in this case RS:UTP. This is not a policy, so it doesn't carry the same weight as the UTP. It is merely intended to be an example for users to see what the policy actually means. I've never seen anyone cite this policy and accuse the opposition of being a dick, so I really doubt that it feeds the flames. The benefits far outweigh the negatives. --Liquid^Talk 01:54, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

If you have never seen it in action, how do you know there are any benefits....? 3rd age farcaster 08:20, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I apologize; that was bad wording on my part. What I meant to say was that I've never seen someone cite the essay with the intention of calling the opposition a dick. I've seen it used a myriad of times; yet, each time it was merely used as a corollary to UTP and nothing got out of hand. --Liquid^Talk 03:12, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Things may not get out of hand. After all, its rather hard to find users spewing out swear words on their enemy's talk pages because those type of users normally get blocked. But could you link me to a case in which it helped at all? 3rd age farcaster 08:20, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - This YG needs to have links to the previous forums regarding this policy, per standard practice. I can't remember the name of the discussion where this was approved, so if anyone remembers it, please put it at the top. Thanks. --Liquid^Talk 01:55, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Comment on proposer's opinions - The word "dick" is not immature, and there is no need to define it in a clearer way. If we decide to let it continue to exist no changes should be made to it. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 02:11, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - Seriously, grow up about the word "dick". If you play runescape and haven't heard the word dick, you haven't played runescape. If you don't know what it means, you aren't legally allowed to play runescape. If it offends you, you don't play runescape. If you don't want to use it then don't, but leave it there for the people who do. Finally, if you think it's unprofessional or anything like that, go bitch about Konami code. User:Haloolah123/Sig 02:33, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what konami code is, nor do I care. Dick is immature in my opinion, and I am sure it is in the opinions of others. You will not change this opinion, and you cannot argue against it. It is an opinion. Even if you don't find it immature, please admit that others do. I don't mind you using it, that reflects badly on you and you alone. However, when the wiki uses it, that reflects badly on the wiki, and all its users. 3rd age farcaster 03:03, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Professionalism doesn't play a role in this argument, at least I don't see one. I oppose the removal of this essay precisely because I think that it augments our policies nicely. It certainly isn't unprofessional. --Liquid^Talk 02:35, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

"If you play runescape and haven't heard the word dick, you haven't played runescape." I've never heard it, I've heard "****". Evil1888 ^{Talk A's L} 02:41, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

To make my opinion clear- I am not offended by dick, nor does the word bother me in the slighest. However, it is slang. Slang is, and will always be, unprofessional. Its a sad day when this wiki knowingly and intentionally tries to be as unprofessional as possible. 3rd age farcaster 03:15, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Our goal is not to be professional for heaven's sake. Our goal is to provide information about RuneScape. RuneScape is NOT a profession. Over 70% of the people we reach are not adults. Wikipedia is WAY more "professional" (damn this word is getting way overused now), and they use it, and have a picture to accompany it. The immaturity argument honestly pisses me off. The fact that we can say it and not have 200 people go put "penis" on the talk page in itself SHOWS that we are mature as a general crowd here. We aren't trying to be unprofessional either. If we were trying to be unprofessional, it would be a lot more evident. User:Haloolah123/Sig 04:08, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Our goal is to provide information about runescape in a professional manner. Over 70% of the people we reach call dragon daggers p++ dds's, saradomin godswords sgs's, etc, and yet, do we call our articles that? NO. Wikipedia does not enter into this. What they do has absolutely nothing to do with us. Why do you consider thinking of it as a penis immature? Does everyone think of it as meaning penis to a certain age and then suddenly stop..? I really don't get that. Regarding this essay, we are being unprofessional. 3rd age farcaster 08:17, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

We have redirects. I think the Wikipedia Analogy is correct. You can't just say I can't use something to argue with because you don't like it. We aren't professional. Professional, the word itself means we exist to make money. That's Wikia, they are professional. We exist to provide as much information on RuneScape as possible, in a clear, concise, and well-thought out manner. This essay does not impede us in doing that. User:Haloolah123/Sig 15:40, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Answer me this: Is it helping? Do you really think it has done any good? Bringing up what wiki does here is like bringing up golf during a soccer game. This essay is slang- why do you support this slang but not other slang? The question is not whether it is making it harder for us to provide information, but rather, is it helping? 3rd age farcaster 15:47, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well you are throwing around words without their meanings making the context make sense. So I just wanted to clarify some things. How can you get less slang than dick? I offered people a chance to come up with other words, and there weren't any better ones. User:Haloolah123/Sig 15:52, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose- Per halo Twig Talk https://i.imgur.com/772kZGs.png 03:34, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Halo. 222 ^talk 06:34, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I agree that maybe it needs to define "dick" better but even if it is never linked that doesn't mean people don't read it and take notice of it and as such it shouldn't be deleted. Sentra246 08:16, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support Removal - I don't need an essay as a reference to tell someone to stop being a douche, prick, newb or to know that i shouldn't be acting like a prick. But until this thread and it's decision is finalised i will be quoting and citing this essay like crazy =P. Btw, nice one EVIL. - [Pharos] 08:22, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Halo Murd3rlogist^{Talk• Contribs •} Sign here 12:45, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Seriously? - The word "dick" is about .5% of the reason it should be removed. Why is everyone focusing on it so much? Furthermore, I asked in the thread for you to come up with a situation in which this essay helps in a way other words or policys could not. So far, none of you have done this. 3rd age farcaster 15:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Because that's what you and everybody else flipped out about when I made the thread for name change. They thought it was too crass, and immature, etc. Naturally that would follow for this. You can't really link to an essay. You can mention it, sure. But you can't cite it as a policy that must be followed. Also, you can't remove it/delete it, you can just request closure on it, because an essay is supposed to progress to being a policy. User:Haloolah123/Sig 15:44, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

edit conflict - Yes, that is what got me onto this debate in the first place. However, honestly, thats not the main problem with the essay. The main problems are its vagueness, its uselessness, and its likelihood to cause more trouble then it solves. The only reason I said that it was unprofessional is to provide a reason why it was actually bad rather then just extremely useless. What you said about not deleting essays is almost for sure a lie. What if I was to write an essay right now about how good vandals are? Would it not be deleted? 3rd age farcaster 15:57, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

But vandals are good...they give our userbase something to keep them on their toes. (Okay, maybe not), but vandals do mean we have an active wiki. While it's not the best testing mechanism, it does show that. I have never seen DBAD cause any problems, could you show me instances of this? And finally, if you were to write an essay, you could really say whatever you want, so long as it's not spam. Spam would be deleted, but otherwise we would just be stuck with requesting closure. User:Haloolah123/Sig 16:03, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

So in other words your saying after something becomes an essay it is unremovable? Again, I don't think thats true, but this wiki does often shock me with its strangeness. Part of the reason you may have never seen it caused any problems is cuz its so dang useless. There is, however, the issue of immaturity. I know this isn't an issue for you, but you must accept it is for me and likely many others. 3rd age farcaster 16:08, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Edit conflict - This was aimed at 3rd age farcaster.

Obviously you don't understand what this is. It's an essay. It's not supposed to be cited. It even says that. So far I see no truly legitimate reason to remove it. Let me list the reasons you said.

The first reason that it seems unnecessary is because it is very hard to find a situation in which it can be used without causing trouble.

It's not supposed to be used, it's supposed to be read.

... Which leads to the possibility that people are ignoring this essay.

It isn't an absolute requirement to read it. They can ignore it if they choose.

... Lastly, "dick" is not clearly defined.

Yes it is.

In my own opinion I don't consider these arguments correct. But it's still an opinion. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 15:52, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

And what good does reading it do? If people ignore it, what the point? No... its not. Thats on wikipedia, not here. Put that definition here and I'll shut up about that point. If its only ment to be read, Then its even more useless. Literally everything said in there is stuff you know when your about 5 years old. Only use of such a page would be as a reminder, assuming the person your reminding doesn't take offense at it. 3rd age farcaster 16:02, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Essays are written to be read. It's that simple. If people ignore it, it doesn't matter. And I'm not the one who didn't copy that part. So stop complaining and make good arguments. Give me a reason why it hurts the wiki. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 16:07, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Done. Stop using indents everywhere please? It really is overkill on the coding and hard to follow. User:Haloolah123/Sig 16:08, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I consider it unprofessional ans well as inconsistant. Thats what it is doing as damage. 3rd age farcaster 16:14, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I've already addressed the unprofessional aspect, could you respond to that and elaborate on inconsistent? Thanks, User:Haloolah123/Sig 16:16, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Do you agree that it is slang? 3rd age farcaster 16:18, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know nobody else agrees that it is slang... ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 16:20, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Which might be the reason I asked if he agreed. I'm just like you, I don't know. I don't know how I can make that any clearer.... 3rd age farcaster 16:22, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well whether or not people think it's slang is not relevant to the discussion. Please stop stalling. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 16:25, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Please stop with the aggressiveness. Its only 100% relevant, seeing as we do not use other slang but, do use dick. THUS INCONSISTENCY. 3rd age farcaster 16:28, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

You're the only one who thinks it's slang. The world does not revolve around you and your views do not reflect others'. Nonetheless, "dick" is not used as slang in this essay. My point still stands that this is irrelevant. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 16:35, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Orly? "

dick (dik)

noun

1. Origin: shortened & altered < detective

Slang a detective

1. Slang, Vulgar the penis
2. Slang a man who is regarded as obnoxious, stupid, etc.: mildly vulgar"

source. So answer me this: Am I really the only one who thinkts its slang? 3rd age farcaster 16:51, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

You really have no sense of context. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 17:43, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, you define dick. 3rd age farcaster 18:28, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

This is not about definition. PLEASE STOP STALLING AND MAKE AN ARGUMENT. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 18:39, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

My arguement is that using slang in an essay conflicts with the fact that we do not use slang or swear words on this wiki. I think I made this arguement a while back, and it would be nice if you would read it next time. 3rd age farcaster 18:42, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I have addressed this by saying that nobody else who knows about the essay believes it is slang. You could read sometime too. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 18:48, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I want proof. Who besides you thinks that its not slang? I did read, and thats why I posted the definition. Also, could u please calm down? 3rd age farcaster 19:16, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I want proof that other people do think it's slang. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 19:20, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I think it's slang, for one. However, 3AF, Please directly address what Killr is asking you. By not doing so, you are agitating him and reducing the chances he will listen to what you have to say. User:Stelercus/Signature 19:20, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what he wants. He says he wants proof, but I provided him with this,so what more can I do? 3rd age farcaster 19:39, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so it's slang. Now prove to me that that makes it unprofessional/unfit to be on the wiki. Riblet15 20:02, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well, we are not allowed to swear here. One of the definitions of dick would be considered offensive. Secondly, if we use slang here, why not use it everywhere? Why not have the articles called con, slay, lp, sgs, dds, etc instead of construction, slayer, life points, saradomin godsword, dragon dagger p++, etc. Furthermore, can you provide any other example of slang here? In addition to that, Dick is a name. Everyone here agrees that dick used in this way is an insult. I know people named Dick will not assume its an attack on them, but why risk even mindly offending people when it is not necessary? Again, though, I would prefer to focus on its uselessness then on a specific word. 3rd age farcaster 20:24, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

If you want to focus on its usefulness then you should act like it. ShinyUnown _{T | C | E} 20:26, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I'm just responding to you. Also, can we draw the indent back left, and then go further right? 3rd age farcaster 20:31, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose removal - Whether or not you have seen it linked, it has been under the redirects (because who uses the full name anymore?) and more-so through m:Don't be a dick. While I'm not too terribly thrilled with copying essays instead of linking them, but the term of dick is "an abrasive and inconsiderate person" as shown in the notes of the essay in the original and copy here. Even if you don't accept the term as it is, it's an essay that many of the supporters of the removal claim it's included in the User treatment policy. One is an essay and the other is a policy. They do not interact nor do they have the same authority behind them. Please look at m:Talk:Don't be a dick and the archives, especially this. The No Asshole Rule and don't-give-a-fuckism (same meaning as can't be arsed) are also similar in the face of what they talk about (the first being a book) and the usage of what many may consider "vulgar." There are over a million words in the English dictionary, some are bound to be seen as vulgar but if you can't handle x then find a way to accept it. While some might not be protected speech depending where you live as libel, or attack language, they shouldn't be forced out because you dislike it due to slang, connotations (go and get your copies of three editions of the Oxford English Dictionary), bias, etc. In truth Wikia isn't censored as much as some like to think so that one should be able to put "Life's a bitch" in the Life's a Beach! article without it getting censored due to the explicit pun (and no, explicit means made visible) even though we have RuneScape:Profanity I can insert where appropriate, even if you do not agree. No matter what policy, somethings shouldn't be censored. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Now, do we need it? Maybe, maybe not. However, I am against the removal of almost any essay or policy when the supporters do due to language as addressed earlier by the opposition and this oppose. Template:Signatures/Bluesonic43 20:37, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

This policy has so much wong with it, removing the bad word would do little good. Theres a difference between slang and swear words, however. Swear words are part of the english language, and well known by nearly all who speak it. Slang goes in and out on a daily basis, and certain forms of slang can only be found in very small regions. As such, professionals tend not to use slang, though they may and often use swear words. I have never seen it linked in any form, typed out or not. 3rd age farcaster 20:51, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Special:WhatLinksHere/RuneScape:Don't be a dick:

Image
http://i919.photobucket.com/albums/ad40/Bluesonic43/Misc/Zarchillis.png

Template:Signatures/Bluesonic43 21:10, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

There's a difference between ruining one's own professional image and ruining that of the wiki. 3AF has the right to be as unprofessional as he wants on his own, and his points specifically say that he doesn't want the wiki being unprofessional, so I would prefer if this image and its inevitable topic didn't receive undue attention. Leftiness 21:18, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

As left said, I can do what I want on my own time. Also, as I have said, I have absolutely no problem with swear words, or even slang for that matter as long as its used in discussions rather then official pages. I am going to ask you to remove that image, as its more of a smear campaign rather then something connected to the discussion. If you like you can post that you have proof that I swear or something else like that, if necessary. 3rd age farcaster 21:25, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Let me be clear, I only posted it because he said he hasn't seen someone link the essay in question, the picture accompanies someone acting as a dick. Two, because I believed he meant everyone including himself. And lastly, to make a point, not cause undue discussion. Template:Signatures/Bluesonic43 21:41, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if thats alot for a page like or that or if its very little. It doesn't seem like much to me, but as I said I don't know. However, I still don't see why we can't just tell people to not be dicks if we want rather then linking them to the essay. Same thing, exept it doesn't reflect badly on the wiki or present confusing, vague, etc information. 3rd age farcaster 23:53, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - "Seriously, I think 3AF has a point. It's not that the word is too offensive for us to handle, and it's not that we're not mature enough, or that using it makes us more mature. I honestly think that the word "dick" is no more effective than the word "noob." The people who are going to laugh it off are going to laugh it off no matter what word is used, and the people who are going to read the policy and understand the meaning are going to understand the meaning regardless of what word we use. Personally, I think it's less professional to use the slang term because you think the offensive nature is going to make it more effective, especially since the offensive nature won't make it more effective. I think the policy should be deleted because, no matter which word we choose, it's not going to be more effective, it can only get less professional, and it really doesn't accomplish anything. If you feel the urge, telling someone "Hey, don't be a dick about it" is just as effective as referring them to RS:DBAD, and then it's just you who looks unprofessional, which is perfectly fine. Leftiness 19:18, July 7, 2010 (UTC)"

... Also, here's a wonderful example of this heavily defended essay in action. Leftiness 20:57, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Let me break down the parts of your proposal.

The first reason that it seems unnecessary is because it is very hard to find a situation in which it can be used without causing trouble. Use it on a vandal and they will more then likely flame you or ignore it. Use to to a user who has been here a while, and they will likely ignore it or dispute whether they are actually being a dick. I cannot think of a situation in which it would be helpful to link someone to this essay, and thus, cannot think of a reason why it should exist. If you have one that I'm missing please fill me in on it.

Also, can the same thing not be said in your own words? We don't need an essay. In-fact, I have never been linked to DBAD nor seen anyone else linked to it. Now, thats not to say it doesn't happen, but its safe to assume its rather rare.

Which leads to the possibility that people are ignoring this essay. There are plenty of people who act like dicks often, and yet, as I have said I have never seen this essay apart from a thread discussing it. If it is being ignored, doesn't that mean it is doing no good for the wiki?

Hard to find a situation, hmm? You yourself plenty of people act like dicks quite often, which means that are plenty of situations in which someone can be told not to be a dick quite often, no? Your main concern these first three paragraphs is that no one is ever told "Don't be a dick" and that people are ignoring this essay. However, in the essay itself it literally says that telling someone not to be a dick is a dickish move, and to be specific about why they're a dick and inform them in a less direct way. This is why you have never been linked or told, you just have to realize when you're being told off for being a dick. It is for reading, not for linking, as others have said.

Now, people may argue its doing no bad, and if no one is seeing it, why must we remove it? However, I find dick to be at the very least rather immature, possibly worse. Furthermore, do we just leave pages around that are doing no good? No, we delete them.

Lastly, "dick" is not clearly defined. I always assumed that the policy literally referred to a certain masculine organ, though other users did not take it this way. If I was linked to that policy, I would take it that the person was calling me my definition of a dick, rather then theirs. This is something that I would take offense at, and, as I said earlier, it would cause only trouble for both of us. I'm sure not every user shares my definition or even thinks of that, but if the essay is going to continue to exist, it must be defined in a clearer way.

Lastly, a certain user recently was complaining about me "using a plethora of internet slang and abbreviations clearly inappropriate for a serious discussion". Please, if any of you have a problem with this, aether correct any of these problems yourself or tell me and I will do it. Thanks.

"Dick" is in fact clearly defined of being an abrasive and inconsiderate person of either sex, it says so right in the essay. I do not believe the term "dick" is immature, I think that complaining about it and being all "0mG penis" is. Want a less slangish, less "immature" word? How about we rename the policy to "Don't be abrasive, inconsiderate, arrogant, rude, or self-absorbed"? That's a catchy title, isn't it? It has come to my attention that you have not even read the page you are trying to have removed. Most of your argument is rendered invalid by just reading the actual page. Thank you for listening to my two cents. Best regards. — ^En_ig^ma 22:45, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

I do not link people to the policy because I do not want to generate unnecessary fights or "make things personal". Dick was not clearly defined when I typed that, as you can clearly see, which makes your second point invalid. What else am I supposed to think besides penis? Again, when your 12 you think penis and then suddenly the second you turn 13 do you start thinking something else? Is that what you think? I don't see why its immature to see one definition before the other. 3rd age farcaster 23:33, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

You're supposed to not link people to it because it's not a policy! It's an essay that displays an aspect of the community that someone noticed and decided to comment on. No one is required to follow it. No one is required to gain anything from reading it. That doesn't mean no one does. Riblet15 00:16, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

What is the point of it then? People know not to act like a "dick". Its just something you learn about how to interact with people. I can understand that you may forget it in heated arguements, in which case a reminder is nessary. However, this is not how the reminder should be. Also, UTP covers it. 3rd age farcaster 00:24, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

UTP tells you to not be mean to people. DBAD tells you to not be fucking mean to people. It's blunt, it's advice, and it's not something you link people to in a heated argument. An essay shows an interpretation of a policy. This one makes a very good point, and it's making it in a way that can't be put into UTP. Riblet15 03:52, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

"UTP tells you to not be mean to people. DBAD tells you to not be fucking mean to people." Seriously? My support for getting rid of this essay just got quite a bit stronger after reading that. Are we so immature that we need an essay with that description? User:Stelercus/Signature 09:30, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

The vulgarity is to catch your eye. UTP tells you to be nice, yadda yadda, but the term "dick" brings it home as something that you clearly do not want to be. The beauty of essays is that they can show the viewpoint of the general population or of a minority group. You don't need to agree with it for it to help someone else. Riblet15 23:57, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

I clearly don't want to be a dick, and yet, you can call me a dick 1000 times and I don't give a crap because I don't give a crap about your opinion. Even if I did, the moment you indicate I'm being a dick I'm totally turned off to your point and will not listen to you no matter how good your reasoning is or how much I have to gain from listening to you. 3rd age farcaster 02:01, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I don't think there would be much harm if keeping it, but if any of us want to cite it, we can always link to it from Wikipedia if we need to. WP essays apply anywhere, even if we're not them. User:C Teng/sig 00:41, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Just for clarification, this isn't a Wikipedia essay, it's from Wikimedia's Meta site (Meta-Wiki). Template:Signatures/Bluesonic43 02:24, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Steler. bad_fetus^talk 15:29, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose General Removal, Support a more 'political description' - If you slap a reference to someone about this, they would most likely take offence to it. I think there is value in what is written here, but in terms of being a good wiki that should support its users to maximize their potential, calling them a dick isn't ideal. Let's reword it.

Bonziiznob ^Talk

14:12, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Removal, Support name change - The last time we had a Yew Grove thread about this DBAN or DBAD essay, I just went and quit using the wiki for a few months. I'm not going to hold an argument here again, because I'm just going to get "Bullied" into following others thoughts on this. I'm stating my opinion on it, you can all have a moan or bitch just after my signature, but I refuse to even reply to anything you post. As for my thoughts on this, dick is a poor immature word choice, there's millions of words in the dictionary, and surely one of them can better fit the title of this essay. Thanks Rhys ^Talk 16:21, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Heres a suggestion...

Be mature

In general, always try to be mature.

Being mature is necessary for nearly all social interactions. If everyone acted mature at all times, then very few other rules would be needed. Unfortunately, people are not always mature, and defining maturity is not easy.

Treat others the way you want to be treated...

A major part of being mature is treating others the way you would want them to treat you. If something offends you, it is likely it will offend others also, even if it is not intended to be offensive. Also, be genuine. Do not ask questions when you know the answer. Do not say you want one thing if you want another. Don't try to persuade people of things that aren't true.

Honestly examine your motivations. Are you here to contribute and make the project better? Or is your goal really to find fault, get your views across, or aggravate other editors? Perhaps secretly inside you even enjoy the thrill of a little confrontation. Being negative and opposing ideas does not make you a bad person, but understand that people have worked hard to come up with these ideas and are just trying to help. If at all possible, always be constructive rather then destructive. If you have an idea about how to improve an idea, suggest it! Or, if the overall proposal is good, but a there are a few small things in it that you do not like, point those out rather then rejecting the entire thing.

If you realize you are in any way not being mature, publicly apologize to anyone to whom you may have been immature toward. Don't worry about looking weak or appearing as though you are backing down. In-fact, it is not uncommon to become friends with users whom you have previously insulted, bullied, or in other ways been immature toward.

...But don't assume everyone will react the same way you would

Assume good faith to the maximum extent possible. If you don't understand why someone is doing something, ask. They may see things you are missing, or vice versa. Negotiate first, complain later. If people did this, the wiki would run far more smoothly and people's efforts could be used in better ways then listening to complaining or trying to solve disputes for you. However, there are also times when it will be necessary to complain. When you do so, always keep a cool head. Don't stoop to the other person's level.

If possible, agree to disagree. To interact with people, it is necessary to realize those you disagree with are not demons, they simply have a different point of view from you.

Lastly, remember that you will come across editors who sole goal is to cause trouble or torment you. These editors are often vandals or trolls, and best left alone. When you come across them as you inevitably will, politely tell them you do not wish to argue or interact with them, and then notify a sysops or other authority figure to work it out.

---

Alright, thats my version of it. I know it needs grammar and spelling checks, and maby some tweaking to make it run more smoothly, but overall, do you consider this better then DBAD? If so, support below. Also, if someone could put the background from my userpage thats black and grey around my idea to make it clear whats a proposal and whats discussion, that would be nice. 3rd age farcaster 18:14, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I'd say this is an expansion of RS:UTP, and I like it - the constructive nature, especially, since I personally don't believe that calling someone an inappropriate name makes you the mature one. This is DBAD in a positive light, and it's just as likely to be taken to heart, in my opinion, since the people that read essays about behavior tend to be the mature ones. With this added to UTP, I'd feel even better about completely removing DBAD. Leftiness 18:30, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

^What he said. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL ^{Talk - Contribs} 05:56, September 17, 2010 (UTC) 

Request for closure - It seems as though we have reached consensus. The "Be Mature" essay will replace DBAD. I know its only really 3 votes, however its been about a month since anyone posted, and in that time nobody seems to have voiced any opposition for Be Mature. 3rd age farcaster 12:15, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

I would never close this, as my position on the issue is too strong. However, as an admin, I can't close this without a single support/oppose vote in sight. User:Stelercus/Signature 12:23, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose "Be Mature" replacing DBAD -People are not posting because they opposed it and walked away, they consider the matter settled. There is NO consensus to replace the essay. Everyone who opposed removing DBAD above MUST be considered as opposing the replacement unless they have specifically said otherwise.--

1. REDIRECT User:Jalepeno Cornbread/Signature 12:30, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Most of them posted before this was here, therefore, we must assume they have not yet expressed any opinion on the matter. User:Stelercus/Signature 12:41, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Support - It's quite similar to DBAD, only every problem I have with it is removed or reworded. A problem I have had with the title that I've failed to mention is that reading "Don't be a dick" implies that the reader is potentially a dick. When I say that, I mean something like this, "This wiki has an essay called Don't be a dick, therefore, they must think I am probably going to be a dick at some point." This will raise their first line of defenses against the essay before reading whatever it has to say. Because the essay is more of a friendly reminder rather than a slap in the face, people are more likely to listen to what it's saying. I actually see people benefiting from reading this, which I can never see happening with DBAD. User:Stelercus/Signature 12:40, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I highly doubt people are going to be more offended with DBAD than BM. Be Mature has the distinction of implying that users are immature. If that was a problem with DBAD (which I don't think it is), BM is not going to solve that problem. As for the actual content itself, I prefer the content of DBAD over the content of BM. DBAD is more direct, and the wording of BM gives me the impression that it's trying to be overly nice to the user, in the process losing much of its information. Thus, I cannot support this. --Liquid^Talk 13:29, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Its not about offending people - I am not offended by the work dick. However, if someone uses it, I will lose all respect for them and likely not even consider listening to their point, because they used slang when slang shouldn't be used. Makes them appear immature, classless, and stupid. And can you give me an example of something about it that is "overly nice"? 3rd age farcaster 13:51, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

The entire section is overly nice. The tone, the syntax, and the diction of the wording makes the wrong impression. For this kind of policy, it's better to have a bit more direct wording. The replacement makes too many indirect suggestions. --Liquid^Talk 19:09, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well, what can I do about it? Do you want to write your own version? 3rd age farcaster 21:11, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

No, I would rather keep DBAD. --Liquid^Talk 21:11, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

So your going to oppose any compromise, any agreement, and listen to no reason, simply because its not DBAD? Is there no way I can make this more appealing to you? 3rd age farcaster 22:15, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to oppose any compromise/agreement; I just don't particularly like this one. I don't think we're going to be able to find common ground on this issue, though. --Liquid^Talk 23:31, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I don't see whats wrong with this, and you aren't willing to come up with anything yourself, so thats a problem. This is exactly whats wrong with wiki- If my essay was in place and I was trying to replace it with the old DBAD, everyone would be all over me saying how DBAD is immature and reflects badly on the wiki. Any change is viciously attacked and dissected. Yes this likely has problems, DBAD is, without question, far worse. Liquid, do you consider DBAD to be 100% flawless? 3rd age farcaster 23:41, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't consider DBAD to be flawless. I consider BM to be even less flawless. --Liquid^Talk 23:43, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

What flaws do you see in DBAD? Its not one or the other, we can improve both. Oh, and for heavens sake, stop calling it BM! Even if the idea's bad, its not bad enough to be a bowel movement . 3rd age farcaster 01:01, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

DBAD is, however. We could rename the proposed policy to be "Do what you would do to you." I can see Liquid opposing that, regardless. User:Stelercus/Signature 01:09, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Do what you would do to you has several issues. I don't really know where to begin. It's way too long. Citing RS:DWYWDTY is not exactly going to be highly popular. Its name is also too ambiguous and awkward. I had to read it twice just to understand that it was a "Do unto your neighbor" type comment. And then, what are we going to write in it? DBAD isn't perfect, but I don't see anything that I'm satisfied with replacing it, nor can I think of anything better. --Liquid^Talk 01:21, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

That is very hard for me to understand, and annoying. If you cannot think of something better then DBAD, I don't see how its anything but perfect- in your view. Same with my idea. I am trying to help, trying to improve the wiki, but all I get are nos and opposes,, no suggestions on how what I can do to make this idea more appealing. . 3rd age farcaster 01:29, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

The previous section has a consensus indicating that the community wants to keep DBAD as it is. --Liquid^Talk 01:50, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that. Even if it did, thats not what we are discussing- I am simply focusing on you, and trying to figure out if there's anything I possibly do that would get you to like this proposal. 3rd age farcaster 02:23, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - I don't think this has the same effect. User:Haloolah123/Sig 04:27, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

^ You are absolutely, 150% correct. However, does it not occure to you that the old effect isn't what we want? 3rd age farcaster 16:02, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

The consensus in the previous section says otherwise. --Liquid^Talk 16:03, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - The point is consensus is one way. No matter how much you want to say you don't like it, that doesn't mean other people will agree with you. No one will agree with every essay/policy, but the majority of people do in this case. User:Haloolah123/Sig 16:08, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

The other section does not matter. If DBAD isn't 100% perfect, then we should make it that way, and I consider you on my side. Liquid, If I linked people to this policy, I would link you to it, seeing as it seems like your opposing without giving any real/specific reason for doing so.. 3rd age farcaster 16:12, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

I already told you. I oppose because I prefer DBAD to this. --Liquid^Talk 16:20, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

The other section does matter. No policy/essay will ever be 100% perfect and please 100% of the people. While you can propose changes that YOU think are better, that doesn't mean the community will agree with you. User:Haloolah123/Sig 16:21, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and you haven't said why you like DBAD better. Maby it is "overly nice" but I will change that if you point out a specific. If you cannot point ont a specific, then I would think you could at least come up with your own idea of how it should be, but you can't.

Also, no, the other second deosn't, seeing as I am proposing a different change now then I was then. Think of it as a new forum in a seporate section. 3rd age farcaster 18:24, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

I like DBAD just fine the way it is. I don't think there should be any changes. The first section shows consensus wants to keep DBAD, unless consensus is achieved in this section. (You could always change it to Act Mature to avoid the BM issue). User:Haloolah123/Sig 18:37, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Ok first, off, do you agree "dick" is slang? Secondly, Be/Act Mature isn't finished, and I expect it will need some word switching, maybe a few spelling corrections, etc. I my self don't care if its Act or Be, so if anyone wants to change that feel free to. 3rd age farcaster

In the sense that it's being used in, no. If it were being used to represent the word "penis", I would agree with you. But in this sense it is being used to mean "an abrasive and inconsiderate person of either sex". User:Haloolah123/Sig 19:06, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

This says otherwise.. 3rd age farcaster 20:36, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

While the way we are using the word is obviously a derivative of that, it's allowed to have more than one connotation. User:Stelercus/Signature 22:17, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

If you are talking 2 me, its still slang no matter the connotation. 3rd age farcaster 22:22, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion doesn't override consensus. The definition is on the page. User:Haloolah123/Sig 22:30, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

That definition never reached consensus. Furthermore, my opinion was never discussed. If you want to say Yourdictionary.com's definition doesn't override consensus, then fine, but please don't bring my opinion into this as thats technically lieing. 3rd age farcaster 22:44, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

How is it lying? User:Haloolah123/Sig 00:35, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Didn't you say that Yourdictionary.com's definition was my opinion? If so, thats a lie. If not, then my opinion has nothing 2 do with the topic seeing as we are talking about slang and This. 3rd age farcaster 00:57, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

I'm talking about your opinion in general over this thread. User:Haloolah123/Sig 01:02, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Again thats changing the topic. At no point did I ever consider saying my opinion override consensus. I ask you again- are you going to say dick is slang and agree with the definition I provided, or try and say dick is not slang and thus say your opinion is above a well recognized sight's definition? What is it? Is dick slang or not? 3rd age farcaster 02:40, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - It just doesn't have the same effect, and it implies immaturity until you've read it. 222 ^talk 00:09, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

But that isn't the effect we want. If you want that then say that, but don't act like DBAD has this divine perfect effect that everyone wants to have. Of all the effects something could have, DBAD has about the very worst. The last thing I want is for my essay to have the same effect as DBAD. 3rd age farcaster 00:32, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Both policies have their problems, but I'd prefer the current one of your proposal, you could say that I see DBAD as "the lesser of two evils" compared to BM. 222 ^talk 01:15, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Here is another point to ponder over. The creation of a "Be Mature" essay would make it appear that the reader is immature before being "educated" by the text; this would annoy many users who already think of themselves as "mature". However with DBAD, most people don't think of themselves as being "dicks". As a result, they won't be offended by the implication that they are "dicks" until they finish reading the essay and are educated by it because they never were one. 222 ^talk 01:22, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

First, whats wrong with DBAD, suggest something and we can start trying to come to an agreement about that. Secondly, then suggest something to fix that. "Don't be immature" if you like. Most anything is fine as long as it doesn't conflict itself and contain slang. 3rd age farcaster 02:40, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

I don't quite follow that^. 222 ^talk 02:45, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Just saying we can change it to don't be immature if you prefer. 3rd age farcaster 14:58, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Guess - Well, I'm not familiar with English. (not very if you ask) I guess DBAD is much more concrete than Be Mature. What Be Mature means would be "We will teach you to be mature, but don't expect you can refuse to grow"; while DBAD means "Don't fall into the pit". Which proposal is currently more important to the RSwiki might refer to those other existing policies. Assume good faith is basically more similar to Be Mature. DBAD has unique properties that "We will not tolernate reductant users" which stands out of other policies. Other than that both policies are stong in one and weak in another, making them hard to compare. But with DBAD it might be able to show a ultimatum line among users.

Rewlf2 05:12, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

I just don't see DBAD's use. I have read it countless times now, and I still don't really get what its supposed to do. If its goal is to draw a line, then that line is not respected as I see people being dicks all the time, and rarely see the essay in use. DBAD is not helping anything, and maybe Be Mature wouldn't aether, but we can just remove both. Anything, however, is better then how it is now. 3rd age farcaster 14:57, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and this is kinda random, but Steler, Andrew closed the DBAN to DBAD thread even though he was massively involved in that discussion. It was also obvious that those two users supported. 3rd age farcaster 15:07, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you're saying something to me or listing my name when you say "But Steler, Andrew closed". If I am one of the two users you're saying supported the thread, I didn't. I was one of the most active opponents. User:Stelercus/Signature 19:57, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

I'm telling you you could have closed this thread, despite the fact that you were involved in it yourself, due to the fact that Soldier could close that thread even though he was involved in it himself, much more so then you are with this. 3rd age farcaster 20:10, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Technically, Soldier should not have determined consensus on the thread seeing as how bias he was on the topic, though his closure was fair. Even then, just because Soldier sees it as acceptable for him to close a thread he is partial to does not mean I should act the same way. You also have to consider that at the moment, consensus is not in my favor, but it was for Soldier. User:Stelercus/Signature 20:17, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

2 people obviously supported, 0 opposed. Thats a different issue anyways. 3rd age farcaster 21:02, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Can we seriously not just leave it be? It is just an essay that we can read if we want to. It's purpose is to show us how a few people see something, not as a leverage for an argument. Replacing DBAD with a "Be Mature" essay would just kill the entire purpose of it. It's an essay not a policy.

1. REDIRECT User:TyA/sig 21:10, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

It reflects badly on the wiki. I may leave it be if it was just that, but its also insulting, unessary, unclear, and immature. 3rd age farcaster 21:38, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

But it is just that. How does it reflect badly to the wiki? And the rest of those things are simply based on how you feel about it.

1. REDIRECT User:TyA/sig 21:41, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Fact: Dick is slang. Since when do encyclopedias use slang? And yes, I am going to kinda operate on how I feel about it,, as most people do. 3rd age farcaster 22:03, September 27, 2010 (UTC)