In a message dated 4/20/2006 2:01:33 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
jkelly(a)fas.harvard.edu writes:
While we're engaging in this critique of Danny's response, it might make
sense
to ask whether or not Danny, and the other office people, are aware that
there
exists some large segment of the admin population who regard it as routine to
undo other admin actions without discussion because they were "out of
process",
or "obviously wrong", or whatever.
I am not a admin, or even a Wikipedian for that matter. I am one of those
never mentioned "wikireaders" who noticed error and inconsistency in the
plasma cosmology article. I have tried to edit the plasma cosmology page but have
run into an admin and his two partners who interestingly enough are big bang
supporters. In other words they support theory A, but also edit Theory B
such that Theory B supports theory A.
I asked this list about ethics. The first reply was "Assuming he is a good
wikipedian, he can do what he damn well pleases."
Personally, I believe that the comment on the front page stating that anyone
can edit wikipedia is false advertisement. I did not find that to be the
case. What I found was that only copy that is approved by the admin and his
helpers will remain in the article.
There are no ethics in Wikiworld. Ethics to the Wikipedian is whatever we
damn well please?
Now I read about a Wikipedian who done as much as anyone but yet was banned
forever for reverting an action of a fellow admin. In the real world that
would be called Guilty until proven innocent and is in violation of every
principle America was founded on. Indeed, we spend trillions of dollars fighting
those countries where the accused is guilty until he proves himself innocent.
Again I am not involved as an admin, I am a reader who cannot stand idly by
while an article in the Wikipedia is obviously slanted toward the opposing
view. It is clear to me however, that my quest is futile, Wikipedia is not
edited by the people, it is run by the admin, who take data given by the people
and tell the story their way. I see things going on that are illegal in the
real world. The admins, I suppose, are run by the office, which can take
secret action without a hearing against anyone.
If they can do that to a seasoned contributor, imagine what is going on with
people like me, who just want to add a few things. Not a chance. I don't
have any suggestions for change, it is far too late for that. But Wikipedians
really should step back and look at what they are really doing. "We, here in
Wikiland, do not allow warring, therefore, when it comes to that, take
notice that we win, you lose, or else you will be banished forever."
It was, in principle, a good idea though...
tommy mandel