Alphax said on July 5:
Michael Turley wrote:
I'm always disappointed when I hear of people leaving, but I'd rather have an unstable person leave because of a failed admin nomination than promote an unstable person to adminship. At least this way, the instability has only driven a single user away.
Um, you seem to forget the case of RickK - an unstable admin who left
and deleted pages when they went...
This is a great inflated bubble of an argument.
Firstly we're told that RickK was unstable. No evidence is presented.
Secondly we're told that RickK "deleted pages" when he went.
Well actually all RickK did when he went was delete his user space articles. As he was a member in good standing when he left, he was surely entitled to do so. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&...
I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable administrator. He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard, and he finally decided he'd had enough. I wish he would come back, but if he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful service. Which I do gladly. Thank you RickK.
I think RickK will be back. RickK was truly dedicated in a unique way. He actually went out of his way to be an asshole. He didn't shy away when the situation warranted, and even when the situation didn't warrant it, he was there to offer an officious, dismissive snide remark. Only in Wikipedia is someone's foulness so celebrated and allowed to truly shine. This was truly his place, his home. He will be back. He has nowhere else to go. Nobody else will put up with him, even the worst customer service call center would have fired him on day one.
This was his support group. With few exceptions, you people are the pettiest tyrants I've ever known, much worse than college RAs. He'll be back. He needs you to validate him.
What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into an encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any money, will never have any credibility.
Outy.
From: "Tony Sidaway" minorityreport@bluebottle.com Reply-To: minorityreport@bluebottle.com,English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Thank you RickK Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:39:54 +0100 (BST)
Alphax said on July 5:
Michael Turley wrote:
I'm always disappointed when I hear of people leaving, but I'd rather have an unstable person leave because of a failed admin nomination than promote an unstable person to adminship. At least this way, the instability has only driven a single user away.
Um, you seem to forget the case of RickK - an unstable admin who left
and deleted pages when they went...
This is a great inflated bubble of an argument.
Firstly we're told that RickK was unstable. No evidence is presented.
Secondly we're told that RickK "deleted pages" when he went.
Well actually all RickK did when he went was delete his user space articles. As he was a member in good standing when he left, he was surely entitled to do so. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&...
I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable administrator. He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard, and he finally decided he'd had enough. I wish he would come back, but if he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful service. Which I do gladly. Thank you RickK.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_________________________________________________________________ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
From: "firstname lastname" cainwilshire@hotmail.com
I think RickK will be back. RickK was truly dedicated in a unique way. He actually went out of his way to be an asshole. He didn't shy away when the situation warranted, and even when the situation didn't warrant it, he was there to offer an officious, dismissive snide remark. Only in Wikipedia is someone's foulness so celebrated and allowed to truly shine. This was truly his place, his home. He will be back. He has nowhere else to go. Nobody else will put up with him, even the worst customer service call center would have fired him on day one.
This was his support group. With few exceptions, you people are the pettiest tyrants I've ever known, much worse than college RAs. He'll be back. He needs you to validate him.
What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into an encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any money, will never have any credibility.
Outy.
Thanks for providing an excellent example of exactly the kind of editor RickK spend much of his time dealing with.
Jay.
The jewel is in the lotus, beauty that arises from muck.
Fred
On Jul 10, 2005, at 12:47 AM, JAY JG wrote:
What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into an encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any money, will never have any credibility.
On 7/10/05, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
The jewel is in the lotus, beauty that arises from muck.
Indeed. It's a fabulous creation. Not so long ago something like this could only be found in the pages of Analog and Astounding.
One of the joys of my childhood was in getting out a volume of World Book Encyclopaedia to look up something. Hours would pass in the blink of an eye as I browsed from one article to another.
Wikipedia is a bit like that, with the abundance of hyperlinks to encourage browsing and random discovery, and perhaps one of its greatest charms is that it ISN'T a buttoned-down corporate affair. There are gems around every corner, little labours of shared love, and everywhere you see people hard at work improving, polishing, shaping; and diving in to be first with an update when something changes.
There's a loving community buzzing along hard at work 24 hours a day, and I cannot be persuaded that this is a bad thing.
On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 05:55:58AM -0600, Fred Bauder wrote:
The jewel is in the lotus, beauty that arises from muck.
Indeed. I'm prompted to wonder how something whose value, even to its creators, lies in other measures than profits, and whose status as "unfinished" is simply an indicator that the human race is not finished either, can be insulted by pointing out those positive characteristics.
From where I'm sitting, it seems the knowledge is the reward, and
continued growth is a good thing. As for credibility, it seems to me that Wikipedia (and now Wikinews as well, to mention another project with which I'm somewhat familiar) has at least drawn even with, if not surpassed, the dubious credibility of other encyclopedic and journalistic sources. Maybe I'm wrong to view this from points of view other than those of Britannica and New York Times editors, but that's what I see, particularly when Wikipedia and Wikinews are being sourced by news agencies and educational efforts with whom Wikimedia projects are sometimes characterized as competing.
Yeah, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think so (obviously).
-- Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org]
On Jul 10, 2005, at 12:47 AM, JAY JG wrote:
What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into an encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any money, will never have any credibility.
"firstname lastname" cainwilshire@hotmail.com wrote in message news:BAY102-F2EC566A9ABE3150C5EC3CDDDD0@phx.gbl... [snip]
What a colossal clusterfuck Wikipedia is. All this effort put into an encyclopedia that will never be finished, will never make any money, will never have any credibility.
Right.
Because we're all here for the money (and the babes :-), and we're really hoping we'll finish it so we can go and find something more fun to do, and we're worried about whether people like you will ever find us credible?
Frankly, o little-ray-of-sunshine, if we ever gain that kind of credibility, **that's** when the word "cluster-fuck" will become applicable.
If it's soooo baaaad, why are you still here?
On 7/9/05, Tony Sidaway minorityreport@bluebottle.com wrote:
Alphax said on July 5:
Michael Turley wrote:
I'm always disappointed when I hear of people leaving, but I'd rather have an unstable person leave because of a failed admin nomination than promote an unstable person to adminship. At least this way, the instability has only driven a single user away.
Um, you seem to forget the case of RickK - an unstable admin who left
and deleted pages when they went...
This is a great inflated bubble of an argument.
Firstly we're told that RickK was unstable. No evidence is presented.
Secondly we're told that RickK "deleted pages" when he went.
Well actually all RickK did when he went was delete his user space articles. As he was a member in good standing when he left, he was surely entitled to do so. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&...
I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable administrator. He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard, and he finally decided he'd had enough. I wish he would come back, but if he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful service. Which I do gladly. Thank you RickK.
If you read back, you will find that I did not refer to RickK as unstable, because I think that would be quite an overstatement of certain personality traits. I want to make sure that no one mistakes that for my comment. The accusations that he deleted pages are not mine, either.
However, to leave in a huff twice over perceived insults indicates a certain degree of impulsiveness that could be described in other, less neutral ways depending on one's perception and past interaction with him. Between RickK and another admin, I was almost driven from Wikipedia within days of registering my user name because I perceived this as a place that was, behind the scenes, not very attractive. Tony Sidaway was actually instrumental in keeping me from obsessing over some of the interpersonal conflicts and directing me toward my current, much more zen-like attitude toward Wikipedia.
Keeping in mind that administrators are the day-to-day face of Wikipedia to the general public and the editors at large, especially new users who arrive every day, I stand by my comments quoted above regarding my preference of unstable persons leaving rather than being promoted to adminship.
On 7/9/05, Tony Sidaway minorityreport@bluebottle.com wrote:
I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable administrator. He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard, and he finally decided he'd had enough. I wish he would come back, but if he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful service. Which I do gladly. Thank you RickK.
While overall I believe he had a greater positive than negative impact on Wikipedia, and worked tirelessly for the project, I do question the willingness to paint him in a wholly positive light without negatives.
RickK was a very volatile personality, and not just recently. I remember him being similar when I joined the project. He was always very prone to taking things personally and regarding statements not directed at him specifically as personal attacks. He bit newbies, including many who meant no malice, but were simply unfamiliar with the Wikipedia way.
I regard him as displaying a form of the Wik disease; slowly becoming convinced he was the sole bulwark against the teeming hordes of chaos, and becoming possessed with the conviction that he was important and unappreciated simply because others were not as fanatical as he. He excused rudeness and sharpness and carelessness because there was simply too much work he had to do, and not enough time to do it.
IMO, he was headed for a burnout for a long time, and it was a largely self-inflicted one.
-Matt (User:Morven)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
Tony Sidaway wrote:
Alphax said on July 5:
Michael Turley wrote:
I'm always disappointed when I hear of people leaving, but I'd rather have an unstable person leave because of a failed admin nomination than promote an unstable person to adminship. At least this way, the instability has only driven a single user away.
Um, you seem to forget the case of RickK - an unstable admin who left and deleted pages when they went...
This is a great inflated bubble of an argument.
Yes it is. I'm sorry I wrote that.
Firstly we're told that RickK was unstable. No evidence is presented.
I know, it was in the context of the previous posts. A very poor choice of words on my part.
Secondly we're told that RickK "deleted pages" when he went.
Well actually all RickK did when he went was delete his user space articles. As he was a member in good standing when he left, he was surely entitled to do so. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&...
I think discussion after the event has proved otherwise - for the same reason that people are encouraged to archive their talk pages instead of just blanking them (or at least providing links to diffs before blanking). Deleting his user and talk pages was felt by at least some to be innappropriate. Again, it was in the context of previous discussion.
I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable administrator. He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard, and he finally decided he'd had enough. I wish he would come back, but if he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful service. Which I do gladly. Thank you RickK.
I have absolutely no idea what RickK did as an admin; but from what I saw of him on Wikipedia, you didn't want to get on the wrong side of him.
Feel free to block me, moderate me on the mailing list, revert every contrib I have ever made, delete my user page, launch an RFAr, etc. I have offended TEH 1337 CABAL, and should be punished.
- -- Alphax OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis
Alphax said:
Firstly we're told that RickK was unstable. No evidence is presented.
I know, it was in the context of the previous posts. A very poor choice of words on my part.
Thanks for moderating and explaining your statements. Not a lot of people trouble to do that and I'm grateful.
I have absolutely no idea what RickK did as an admin; but from what I saw of him on Wikipedia, you didn't want to get on the wrong side of him.
Well I seldom agreed with him, and he knew it. I valued his work, and still do.
Feel free to block me, moderate me on the mailing list, revert every contrib I have ever made, delete my user page, launch an RFAr, etc. I have offended TEH 1337 CABAL, and should be punished.
TINC :)
Tony Sidaway wrote:
I object strongly to the characterisation of RickK as an unstable administrator. He was one of the best we've had, he worked long and hard, and he finally decided he'd had enough. I wish he would come back, but if he's had enough then we should be thanking him for his long and faithful service. Which I do gladly. Thank you RickK.
RickK is sometimes controversial, but people should understand why -- he has the stomach to deal with some of the worst trolls and vandals around. At least once a month, I have gotten a long and tortured email about some alleged abuse by RickK, and each time I would dutifully investigate what he had done. And each time, I was amazed at how patient and thorough he was in dealing with some very difficult people.
Has he at times been sharp with people? Of course, but keep in mind the types he deals with on a regular basis. It is very easy to sit back and second guess various judgment calls -- and much harder to be out there on the front lines making those judgment calls.
Thank you, RickK.
--Jimbo