...or someone who knows full well what our definition of troll is, having read the numerous policy discussions on the subject, but chooses to misrepresent it for god-knows-what-reason.
-- ambi
On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:15:57 -0700 (PDT), Mark Richards marich712000@yahoo.com wrote:
Erm, as far as I can see, we havn't got any further than the traditional definition of a troll as:
"Someone who annoys me" or "Someone I disagree with".
Mark
--- Arkadiusz Danilecki adanilecki@cs.put.poznan.pl wrote:
Hi there! I subscribed actually to discuss only one thing. From time to time i follow some discussions without taking part in it. But this time i just could stop myself for adding my point of view.
There are discussion about how bad, bad people caused some valuable editor to leave (or wanting to leave) wikipedia. The problem is, that this "valuable" editor with contacts with me and some of my friends behaved quite often in vey unpleasant ways. He was unable to tolerate almost any Point of View except his own. He was unable to accept that someone could write something else because he has different PoV, not because he is troll or fanatic. He was unable to actually discuss many things.
I know that he contributed a lot and sometimes was forcing more PoV-ish outlook in some articles, if sometimes unintentionally. However, it seems that some people are trying to paint him as some kind of saint.
I am on wikipedia since end of 2001. I met a lot of people which I respected a lot more than him. People, who were able to discuss and argue. Which then left because of trolls. Heck, even I once left wikipedia for few months because i got frustrated because of trolls and because i stopped to add new articles but only watched over old ones. But, for God's sake, the men you are using as example of best valuable editor is the one which, amongst many others "valuable editors", inspired me to write
(http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_deal_with_Poles).
He had his vices. And this all case is prime example that imposing MORE structures into wikipedia does not change anything. Before there were arbitrations, mediations, shmediations, etc there were trolls and people were leaving wikipedia. If you will include another level: "the editors" you probably would still get trolls, and valuable people instead of leaving, maybe won't stop coming to wikipedia.
The solution would be to simply adding community voting mechanism for banning someone from certain article (but not from talk pages!) or to add mechanism for "pending changes", when every page change had to be voted until applied, or something similar. That would at least forced people in talking in talk pages instead of just reverting with remarks like "you are obsessed petty fanatical troll".
A.D.Danilecki
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l