On 02/03/2008, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
It gets mostly negative when they try to thing that it all depends on them, and if they dont make this particular deletion )or this particular save), nobody will ever catch it or fix it or restore it, WP will progressively go down hill without them, and the reputation will suffer irrevocably. WP does encourage obsession that way, in admin processes as well as writing. I',m back to my old hobby horse,
Yeah. Learning not to care - to clear the idea of ownership out of one's own thinking about one's Wikipedia contributions - is important.
I abandoned my watchlist in late 2004 and haven't missed it ;-)
Having a baby daughter is also useful for this self-discipline. "What's that? The wiki's going to Hell? I'm sorry, my daughter is gurgling cutely, and that's *much* more urgently important. I'll get back to you."
but i think the first step in getting admins to accept responsibility is for them to all be identifiable human beings. I accept the need for anonymous contributiors; I do not accept the need for anonymous people in authority.
Depends. With e.g. the psychotic viciousness shown by the people who hang out on Wikipedia Review, I'd question that as a good idea for everyone. You shouldn't need to be a seasoned cyber-warrior able to deal with any ridiculous crap just to be an admin on Wikipedia. In fact, such a requirement will I suspect lead to more burnout.
- d.