o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Post 11.
Regarding the assertion:
| In the present state of Wikipedia, the rules in practice and the | prevailing attitudes of administrators are all skewed in favor | of the Infantile Vandals and the Expert Disrupters, while the | Accurate Reporters and Responsible Scholars don't stand a chance.
I don't want to argue the details of the specific 3RR charge. I have already stipulated that it was a "bad thing" for me to let myself get pulled into that, and probably wouldn't have let it happen except for the extreme circumstances.
And I am not here to defend my individual self. I am speaking for what I know to be the generic attitude of folks who take things like accuracy and verifiability seriously, who do not suffer fools gladly, as the saying goes, when it comes to that. It's clear to me that most folks like that would have walked away, probably quietly but no less disgustedly, long before putting up with the kind of sophomoric toilet-papering that I have had to put up with on this score.
I've already been told that the WP hieratchy thinks it can afford a high attrition rate among conscientious people, and that is confirming what I already said above.
The fact that nobody has yet bothered to read the stuff that I have written in those WQAs, RFCs, and my answer to the 3RR is the thing that tells me that this place is utterly beyond hope.
I will exercise the remainder of my responsibility to try and point out some obvious problems, and then I will get out of your hair.
Let the sun shine in ...
Jon Awbrey
George Herbert wrote:
On 6/20/06, Jon Awbrey jawbrey@att.net wrote:
(...)
Ok, I'm sorry, but I don't understand what your complaint is here that is causing you to want to withdraw.
You appear not to have been seriously or lastingly sanctioned for anything; GTBacchus warned both you and JJL not to 3RR / edit war, and then Voice of All blocked you for 24 hrs and then 2 minutes later, changed that to just a warning. I think it's clear that for the activities of the 12th and earlier, both you and JJL were in some way misbehaving, though you're the one who got slightly and temporarily bitten.
None of that concludes the underlying content issue in JJL's favor.
You essentially "got away with" a 3RR vio (block was changed back to a warning), which is unusually tolerant. You may not be very familiar with block policy, but generally only well known and apologetic editors are unblocked early after a 3RR 24 hr block. You were clearly by normal standards given the benefit of the doubt regarding whether it was serious misbehavior.
Being blocked and warned is merely a symptom that you carried on the mutual edit warring with JJL for a couple of hours too long after the warnings. That's not a decision that you were all wrong and he was all right.
I also think that you and JJL have not constructively engaged in discussion on the article talk page regarding the key points of dispute. Nor have you asked for mediation with JJL.
This is not intended as a personal attack on you, but you appear to be an ineffective editor, in that you do not appear to understand the mechanisms Wikipedia is using here. Your perception that you're being picked on or driven away is an overreaction to what are really fundamentally mild warnings and reactions to your making some mild but clearly good intentioned steps across the WP policy line.
There are cases where I believe longer experience "more popular" admins and editors have abused newer editors to some degree or another. But I think your claims here are unsubstantiated. If you cannot understand Wikipedia well enough to work with the system, then perhaps you should stop editing for the time being. But blaming the system, when it has not fundamentally mistreated you, is an excuse.
The system is not perfect, but the system isn't the problem here. You have a perfectly normal, reasonable content disupute with another editor. You haven't been abused or pushed around. If you can't work within the Wikipedia rules to resolve the problem, then that is your problem. Thousands of other active editors are able to resolve these sorts of problems routinely.
-- -george william herbert gherbert@retro.com / george.herbert@gmail.com
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Jon_Awbrey o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o