Gracenotes wrote:
On 6/19/07, Slim Virgin slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/19/07, Gracenotes wikigracenotes@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/19/07, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@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