Should any of us declare war on vandals?
Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is, would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
The Cunctator wrote:
Should any of us declare war on vandals?
Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is, would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
Jimbo Wales declaring a war on vandals would be in my opinion as useful as George W. Bush (idiot!!!) declaring a war on terror, it means absolutely nothing and the distinction between vandals and vandalism is an extremely blurry line.
-Jtkiefer
The Cunctator wrote:
Should any of us declare war on vandals?
Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is, would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
Who's been declaring war on vandals?
Chris
Vandals are often trollish. Don't feed the trolls, just clean up after them and only block when you need to.
Mgm
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
Should any of us declare war on vandals?
Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is, would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
Who's been declaring war on vandals?
Chris
-- Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org
"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful." -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Vandals are often trollish. Don't feed the trolls, just clean up after them and only block when you need to.
I agree; yet am confused as how this is a response to what I wrote.
Chris
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
My email program shows it as a reply to the thread, not just your message.
I'd be really grateful if you could hit reply on the email which you are replying to, rather than a different one. It's more helpful for those of us with different email clients. :)
Chris
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
My email program shows it as a reply to the thread, not just your
message.
I'd be really grateful if you could hit reply on the email which you are replying to, rather than a different one. It's more helpful for those of us with different email clients. :)
Chris
-- Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org
I could, but if I did that I would mess up the listings in GMail which I use myself. I can't make everyone happy at the same time. I'll try quoting part of the messages I reply to instead, which hopefully makes as much people happy as possible.
Mgm
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
I could, but if I did that I would mess up the listings in GMail which I use myself. I can't make everyone happy at the same time. I'll try quoting part of the messages I reply to instead, which hopefully makes as much people happy as possible.
Why does it mess up the listing in Gmail? If that's the case, Gmail is broken.
Chris
I could, but if I did that I would mess up the listings in GMail which I use myself. I can't make everyone happy at the same time. I'll try quoting part of the messages I reply to instead, which hopefully makes as much people happy as possible.
I'm just replying to this through gmail just to see for myself; please disregard.
-- Chris Jenkinson http://talrias.net/
I'm just replying to this through gmail just to see for myself; please disregard.
On 04/02/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Vandals are often trollish. Don't feed the trolls, just clean up after them and only block when you need to.
I agree; yet am confused as how this is a response to what I wrote.
Chris
-- Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org
"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful." -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- Chris Jenkinson http://talrias.net/
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
Should any of us declare war on vandals?
Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is, would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
Who's been declaring war on vandals?
[[User:Cool Cat]].
The Cunctator wrote:
[[User:Cool Cat]].
One person? It seems a more productive path would be to discuss it on his talk page rather than discussing it behind his back on the mailing list - as far as I know, he's not subscribed.
Chris
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
[[User:Cool Cat]].
One person? It seems a more productive path would be to discuss it on his talk page rather than discussing it behind his back on the mailing list - as far as I know, he's not subscribed.
He's the person who founded the "Counter Vandalism Unit", so his attitudes are influential.
He wrote on my talk page: "Are you sure you are worthy of admin tools (strictly judging from your incivil and rather annoying attitude here at wikipedia and on the mailing list). I DOnt believe if you had an RfA now it would have passed."
So it's evident he's aware of the mailing list, if not participating in it. I've left a message on his talk page.
Judging by the comments he left me, I have trouble seeing how a one-on-one conversation would be constructive, but I'm certainly willing to try.
G'day Chris,
The Cunctator wrote:
[[User:Cool Cat]].
One person? It seems a more productive path would be to discuss it on his talk page rather than discussing it behind his back on the mailing list - as far as I know, he's not subscribed.
That is an excellent point --- but it's not just Cool_Cat. In fact Cool_Cat himself is quite good when it comes to vandals; he's written the vandalism-sensing bot which I gather is quite useful, raised awareness of the problem of vandalism, and done other neat stuff that I'm sure I'd remember if I hadn't just returned from a hard night of softball. I haven't noticed any harmful interactions between him personally and vandals.
The problem is that his "war on vandals!" attitude is shared by the "Counter-Vandalism Unit". Now, CVU boasts quite a few great people, who are calm and efficient and cluey and would really be doing the same job whether CVU existed or not. But it *also* includes many newbies who've arrived, seen an interesting-looking clique, and signed on, jumping into the vandal-fighting thing without really knowing anything else about Wikipedia. These people, as well as being bloody annoying when they get underfoot (such as demanding admins speedy articles or block users on their say-so, regardless of policy or, more importantly, Common Sense), are also the ones most likely to bite newbies.
One memorable time --- I have no diff, alas --- I saw a CVU member berating an anon user for causing "us in CVU" to worry and waste time dealing with vandalism. Funnily enough, the reason I remember it is because I got a little irritated that the user in question really believed CVU was the be-all and end-all of vandalism-fighting activities, and didn't give a second thought to the whole newbie-biting stuff of complaining at a user that his vandalism was causing stress. There's a little newbie-muncher in all of us.
-- Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!" - Danger Mouse
The Cunctator wrote:
Should any of us declare war on vandals?
Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is, would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
The more wars you declare, the greater your chances of losing wars.
War on terror, war on crime, war on poverty, war on drugs, war on vandals. Such an approach as easily encourages what it seeks to destroy. The Vandals were one of the enemies of the Roman Empire; can we do as well against them.
In the Nov./Dec.2005 issue of "Adbusters" there is an interesting quote. "Why, of course, the people don't want war ... That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a parliament or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." Herman Goering had a lot to be retrospective about when he said that in 1946.
Some might get literal about the term country, and argue that Wikipedia is not a country. But if we are not a country, what the hell are we doing declaring wars.
Ec
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Some might get literal about the term country, and argue that Wikipedia is not a country. But if we are not a country, what the hell are we doing declaring wars.
Wikipedia is a community. However, I am one that believes that the dimensions of an online community and its related phenomena exist in a different state then any country. Perhaps, that seems absurd to some that look upon computers as a mere object, and it appears appropriate to include jurisdiction of the any country to any computer within it. However, there is a correlation between what computer do and what the human body can do also. The politics on computers may one day create a rude-awakening to those concerned about their own human ability. In essence, related to the previous quote about leaders that drag the people along, a war on computers is a war on people. Computers were originally just people (see [[computer]]).
Some might get literal about the term "computers."
Don't declare war on vandals... teach, education, provide something of interest for them to get involved into the community.
Jonathan