On 27/10/2007, Monahon, Peter B. <Peter.Monahon(a)uspto.gov> wrote:
Earlier:
"... we were absolutely savaged by the editors..."
Peter Blaise responds: Yes, that's it exactly. The editors admins
sysops moderators developers whatever seem all too often in an angry
mood, as if we mere contributors were interrupting their otherwise fine
day. "If it wasn't for those dang customers, this job would run
smoothly!" =8^o
I keep harping on
- patience,
- tolerance,
- acceptance
- and equivalent consideration,
... but I do see them as the "count to 100 before replying" cool down
opportunity.
For instance, I suggested on another mediawiki list that folks could
simply scroll-on if they're not interested in a post, or if they must
take responsive action, they could set an example of the kind of post
they would prefer, instead of merely complaining. One of "them"
immediately ripped my head off for my insensitivity to the difficult job
"they" have. I guess that was an example of the kind of post they
prefer! Doh!
"We have seen the enemy, and it's us" - Pogo
The general psychological makeup of people who can repetitively do
tasks on Wikipedia may have some connection to a lack of social
niceties within "discussions". Ie. if someone can do a hundred mundane
things without complaining, they are likely a person who likes to have
method and structure. The informal structure of discussions,
particularly ones where there is no clear global answer, will annoy
them. Admin duties have a psychological bias, not to say that all
admins will have that bias, but it is definitely a likely option.
Hopefully there are ways to counter the bias, because it will
consistently hinder rather than encourage people to contribute more.
Peter Ansell