>
>
> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 17:34:26 +0100
> From: Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
>
> On 11 September 2012 17:29, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net> wrote:
> > It seems I have not posed this as a question. The question is how could
> > we better handle VIP subjects who give us feedback, attempt to edit
> > either themselves or through an agent, or contact OTRS?
> >
> > For example, could we assign some diplomatic people to handle such
> > situations, I've noticed CBS does that. It's a skill.
>
> We have assigned diplomatic people to handle such situations - they're
> the OTRS volunteers. The problem is how we make sure people get
> directed to OTRS.
>
>
One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as representative
of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as being
dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large
portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective at
changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with
protecting territory than having accurate information.
Even more fundamentally, WP admins are not accountable for doing a good
job, only avoiding doing a bad one. Until that changes, most admins have
little incentive to be anything beyond mediocre. Sure, I believe they
generally mean well, but if they think they're right, why shouldn't they be
rude and drive off the annoying editor who says they're wrong, rather than
waste a bunch of time trying to be helpful and diplomatic. They can be as
rude and territorial as they want, provided they don't cross the line into
"abusing the tools", and no-one will punish them, so why should they bother
politely pointing someone to OTRS, much less spend time and effort trying
to be diplomatic themselves?
Sxeptomaniac