Kelly Martin wrote:
Unfortunately, the people in the bleachers seem unable
to see us, and
pretend that we're not actually doing anything.
Thanks for the support, though.
Maybe it's that the people in the bleachers are actually unable to see
you? In which case, they're not pretending anything. And wouldn't
treating sincere people as fakers make the situation worse?
Andrew Gray wrote:
Basically, the problem is not that we have people
burning out by
dealing with complaints; that's to be expected.
Not the whole problem, surely, but could that be part of the problem?
It seems to me like both Wikipedia as a whole and this list in specific
have a hard time taking upset people very seriously. If they are
outsiders, then they end up on the road to sanctions, moderation, and
bans. If they are insiders, it's a different path, but still seems to
lead to marginalization.
Taking that as a given for a moment, it seems like we guarantee
permanent problems when we put editors in a situation that a) we don't
hear much about, and b) leads to burnout.
I don't think we can change the dynamic, but could we get out of this by
making the rot problems more visible, so that it's not just an
unfortunate few who see the need to change?
William