Gracenotes wrote:
On 6/19/07, Slim Virgin <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 6/19/07, Gracenotes
<wikigracenotes(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/19/07, Marc Riddell
<michaeldavid86(a)comcast.net> wrote:
Slim Virgin wrote:
>>Yet we persist in doing it here
>>-- and worse, because we have no idea who our "menial employees" are,
>>
>>
>>or whether we have one person filling several jobs -- using the excuse
>>
>>
>>that adminship is "no big deal."
>>
>>
Only if we want to create a culture that glorifies article creators and
despises maintenance workers ...
Gracenotes, you need to read what you're responding to. Someone else
made the analogy of admins and editors to "menial employees." It was
just an analogy; it said nothing about article creators v. maintenance
workers. The hyperbole has to stop, because it's just an attempt to
stoke things up.
I am aware that my paragraph is somewhat out of context, and is
more meant as a general response to the so-called "culture" for which
you've recently been advocating. But it's a piece of satire (so, like A
Modest Proposal, it naturally employs hyperbole), and I hope to heaven
that you realize that.
When it comes to hyperbole and satire caution is warranted. Not
everybody gets it, and there are some who are a little quick to take it
literally, especially if it seems that it is a veiled attack. As I
replied to Marc, when I use "menial" it simply refers to a low level
domestic or other low skill job without any connotation about the more
general worth of the person.
Or else I shall get a wall to bang my head against.
(Figuratively.)
See Marc's references to the Head-On ads. :-)
It's meant to intellectually stoke things up, to
get people
to *think* about things; I have talked to some editors who have indicated
that they sense the atmosphere in some parts of Wikipedia discourages
original thinking about extra-content situations.
You're right. This happens, but the problem with intellectual stoking
is that it can sometimes get the fire burning a little too hot.. As
much as I grok what you are trying to say, "original thinking" may be
the wrong term here because it sails too close to that other hot-button
subject, "original research". There are some very serious social issues
affecting Wikipedia, and finding common ground in these discouraging
grounds is a huge challenge.
Ec