On 24/05/2014 03:31, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
>"*On a surprisingly large number of occasions,
the criticism there
has led to exposing serious problems that desperately needed
some of the commentary can be downright painfully precise when pointing
out the movement's gaffes".
>"The problem with WO - and it's a fatal
one - is one of motivation.
The vast majority of participants there do not offer
critique out of a
desire to improve how we do things, or point at things that we are doing
wrong with the aim of having them fixed; they do so out of spite,
revenge or simple outright malice.
(1) This point has already been made, but it bears repeating. If the
criticism is valid, as you seem to agree, why does the *motive* matter?
(2) How do you know what the motives are? Are you a psychologist or a
criminologist? My experience of WO is that many of the participants are
driven by a sense of injustice at perceived mistreatment or unfairness
on Wikipedia. That's just a speculation of course.
>It is no coincidence that the more prolific
participants there are
people who were excluded from the on-wiki discourse before
is the rallying point of the malcontent.
This is the case with most protest movements. If enough people think
something is going wrong, and if they see no way of fixing things
through 'official channels', then they will find some other place to rally.
>The *reason* why they are so often uncannily
accurate in their
"investigations" is because they are driven by an
obsessive need to turn
over every rock, pick apart every comment, and expose (with no regard
for safety or privacy) those they deem to be their adversaries.
When the problem involves conflict of interest, i.e. when someone is
using an anonymous account on Wikipedia to promote some agenda or
interest, it is obviously very difficult to avoid revealing identity or
interest - particularly when it involves people massaging articles about
themselves. When WO does this in the published articles it makes every
effort to address the principle involved, rather than the person.