Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 06:30:01 +0100
From: "A Nony Mouse" <tempforcomments(a)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Whether he is "barely" deserving of a fair treatment or otherwise, nobody
here has given him a fair treatment by any stretch of the imagination.
That won't do.
I wouldn't know. I'm not acquainted with the banned user.
I also have Phil's "circle the wagons"
rant up above. He thinks expansion
kills online communities. I think he's right.
Expansion kills online communities because of people
like Phil who won't
admit that they need to let go and they need to deal with the new people
coming in fairly. People like Phil who think that "shoot them all unless
they are exactly like us and make no noise whatsoever" is the way to go
about dealing with newbies.
Heck, expansion kills other communities, too, when people happen to be
bigots about either the newcomers or the old-timers. Phil, not all
newcomers are like you. Some newcomers like to have fun, but they aren't
necessarily out to be trolls. Anony, people like Phil are all over the
place, not just on Wikipedia. There are probably numerous open-minded
chaps on Wikipedia nonetheless. (Phil, if you want to be viewed as
open-minded, well, open up your mind, I guess unless, of course, you ARE
open-minded, in which case, try not to rush to conclusions on every Newbie
that comes within your reach.
Now you know why I went anonymous. If I didn't Phil
would be leading a
charge to have me removed right now for saying that.
If Phil did that, that would be unnecessary and POV censorship.
David and SlimVirgin's behaviour in this matter has
been sub-par. So has
behaviour of the rest of you on this list.
Anony: What behavior? I didn't act before because I was busy and because I
didn't know very much about the issue. Therefore, I shouldn't be accused
of sub-par behavior, for I hadn't performed ANY behavior at the time of
your letter. No doubt there are others. Here's a case of POV on
This doesn't just affect that one
user. It affects everyone they tell about Wikipedia. It affects everyone
agreed with them on one topic or another at Wikipedia.
I've only looked
the Enviroknot profile for any length of time but based
on its list of
contributions there was potential for a good editor. Solid edits were
and backed up on talk pages, edit summaries and
wikipedia policies were
If that's the case, then Enviroknot shouldn't have been banned right away;
he should've been WARNED beforehand, at least once or twice, or given a
The only offense I can see in the Enviroknot profile is
a pair of 3RR
violations. The one SlimVirgin put in tonight is totally unjustified. The
one earlier when people were claiming Enviroknot was also another IP
is pushing your luck.
I wouldn't know about those offenses. Don't ask me - I'm no admin.
Meanwhile, editors and administrators alike have been
looking for any excuse to attack it. None of you
bothered to set aside
feelings long enough to look at the situation.
If that is true, then it's stupid.
That isn't right. The behaviour of all of you in
this scenario is making
sick to my stomach. I thought you were better than
this. If that's really
Phil's attitude, then there's no way he should be given power at
If the rest of you share that attitude, then Wikipedia
A.Nony.Mouse, for the purpose of this conversation.
WIKIPEDIA IS NOT DOOMED, OK? I fail to see how being a bit trigger-happy
necessarily dooms Wikipedia, although I recognize it as being somewhat bad
policy if it can be avoided.