Marc Riddell wrote:
If what was said is the truth, and is still not
believed, where to do go
from there as far as an explanation is concerned? And, if we don't find
"ways to fix" it, what do you believe will happen?
I've made some suggestions in previous emails on this topic. The ones I
liked the most, in bullet point form:
* List the existence of these various special-interest mailing lists at
[[Wikipedia:Mailing lists]] or some equivalently prominent public space,
to remove the air of secrecy that caused so much of the visceral
reaction in this case. I see that this has already been done for the two
mailing lists that caused this kerfuffle in the first place, that's good.
* Create some kind of page where we can describe "our side" of these
scandals when they erupt and make its existence widely known, so that
users who are participating in discussions on slashdot or talking with
journalists and such will have someplace to refer people to and
someplace where they themselves can find out details they'll need to
know in order to defuse misunderstandings. I originally suggested
WikiNews or Signpost, but any sort of prominent public noticeboard would
be fine. I still don't know anything significant about the Bagley thing
other than what I read on the Register, for example.
I'm sure there are other good suggestions floating around in these
enormous threads, those are just the ones that I can recall proposing
myself.
If we don't find "ways to fix" this, I believe that Wikipedia's
internal
culture will be perceived as increasingly insular, cliqueish, and
paranoid by the general public. Indeed, I think it's actually in danger
of _becoming_ increasingly insular, cliqueish and paranoid. Our own
reactions to perceived threats to the project has been causing us more
damage than the threats themselves would have.
This isn't a doomsday prediction, I think the project would be able to
endure a heck of a lot of internal problems without disintegrating. But
it certainly won't be as vibrant or as fun to work on as it would be
otherwise.