I hope we are all proud of ourselves about how tolerant we are with people who consistently exhibit anti-social behavior. Andre has left the project due to fatigue with having to deal with these miscreants and I am so /disgusted/ with loosing yet another great en.wiki contributor that for at least the next several days I am going to concentrate on the Spanish Wikipedia and contemplate priorities on my own future involvement in en.wiki.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 12:53:43PM -0700, Daniel Mayer wrote:
I hope we are all proud of ourselves about how tolerant we are with people who consistently exhibit anti-social behavior.
I am proud that we are a wiki, and I hope we remain one.
Andre has left the project due to fatigue with having to deal with these miscreants
Then he was under a misconception. He did not have to deal with them.
-M-
So we just let the obnoxious ones run roughshod over all of the work and ignore their ridiculous changes? Zoe mattheww+wikipedia@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:Then he was under a misconception. He did not have to deal with them.
-M- [Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 12:44:26PM -0700, Zoe wrote:
mattheww+wikipedia@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
Then he was under a misconception. He did not have to deal with them.
So we just let the obnoxious ones run roughshod over all of the work and ignore their ridiculous changes?
No. We fix them when we have the energy to do so. When we get tired, we trust that others will pick up the slack, rather than assuming that the only solution is to ban.
-M-
mattheww wrote:
Zoe wrote:
mattheww wrote:
Then he was under a misconception. He did not have to deal with them.
So we just let the obnoxious ones run roughshod over all of the work and ignore their ridiculous changes?
No. We fix them when we have the energy to do so. When we get tired, we trust that others will pick up the slack, rather than assuming that the only solution is to ban.
We also come back when our energy returns and fix the last obnoxious edit. By this time, according to Jimbo's theory (which I find reasonable), the obnoxious person is likely to have gone home. If we are unable to keep with them (even after this wait), however, then we can ask for help from the militia, say on the mailing list.
Initially, of course, we should try to talk to the obnoxious person and convince them to become good Wikipedians like the rest of us. But the above is about what to do after we've given up on that; there is still the ability to "ignore and revert" before banning is needed.
I do think that mattheww put it a bit glibly as "He did not have to deal with them.". He did not have to attempt to work things out with them once they had clearly demonstrated that they wouldn't act in good faith. He still had to revert their edits, but that is quick.
-- Toby
Daniel Mayer wrote:
I hope we are all proud of ourselves about how tolerant we are with people who consistently exhibit anti-social behavior. Andre has left the project due to fatigue with having to deal with these miscreants and I am so /disgusted/ with loosing yet another great en.wiki contributor that for at least the next several days I am going to concentrate on the Spanish Wikipedia and contemplate priorities on my own future involvement in en.wiki.
And that's a shame... I think everyone gets 'battle fatigue' occasionally. I stepped back for 3 weeks because I was getting steamingly mad over the way we argue things round and round in circles to the detriment of doing the real work. Hopefully Andre will decide to return once he's recharged his batteries for awhile.
The thing is, like it or not, the sysops ARE a defacto police force. It doesn't matter that we have the ability to make these changes because we asked for it. We care about the pedia enough to take action when necessary. And yes, I think that should include the temporary banning of people who repeatedly violate the code of conduct for the wikipedia. I agree with KQ about this - atm the code of conduct is unwritten, but when you sign up for virtually any other website you have to agree to follow one. We should do the same - when you create a login you need to agree to follow the basic rules - no name-calling, no vandalism, and no uploading of copyrighted materials. Being caught doing any of those things should be AUTOMATIC cause for unquestioned suspension for a period of time. No arguments and no questions asked.
On 10/24/02 9:00 PM, "Karen AKA Kajikit" kaji@labyrinth.net.au wrote:
The thing is, like it or not, the sysops ARE a defacto police force.
I don't like it.
It doesn't matter that we have the ability to make these changes because we asked for it. We care about the pedia enough to take action when necessary. And yes, I think that should include the temporary banning of people who repeatedly violate the code of conduct for the wikipedia. I agree with KQ about this - atm the code of conduct is unwritten, but when you sign up for virtually any other website you have to agree to follow one. We should do the same - when you create a login you need to agree to follow the basic rules - no name-calling, no vandalism, and no uploading of copyrighted materials. Being caught doing any of those things should be AUTOMATIC cause for unquestioned suspension for a period of time. No arguments and no questions asked.
I strongly and vociferously disagree with that attitude. SoftSecurity is so much better than such a policy of HardSecurity.
Especially "no name-calling". What's name-calling? How about just extreme sarcasm? And what is vandalism?
And even copyrighted materials are not that big a deal.
And one of the great things about wikis and Wikipedia is that you don't even have to login to edit.
The only thing we must (legally) have editors agree to is the GFDL. Everything else can be dealt with through SoftSecurity.
--- The Cunctator cunctator@kband.com wrote:
On 10/24/02 9:00 PM, "Karen AKA Kajikit"
It doesn't matter that we have the ability to make
these changes because we
asked for it. We care about the pedia enough to
take action when
necessary. And yes, I think that should include
the temporary banning of
people who repeatedly violate the code of conduct
for the wikipedia. I
agree with KQ about this - atm the code of conduct
is unwritten, but
when you sign up for virtually any other website
you have to agree to
follow one. We should do the same - when you
create a login you need to
agree to follow the basic rules - no name-calling,
no vandalism, and no
uploading of copyrighted materials. Being caught
doing any of those
things should be AUTOMATIC cause for unquestioned
suspension for a
period of time. No arguments and no questions
asked.
I strongly and vociferously disagree with that attitude. SoftSecurity is so much better than such a policy of HardSecurity.
Especially "no name-calling". What's name-calling? How about just extreme sarcasm? And what is vandalism?
Zero-tolerance policies are always disasters waiting to happen.
For example, if I say on a talk page that the Cunctator did something stupid, and responds that calling his reasonable and prudent action "stupid" could be considered vandalism, do we both get banned?
I will never support any kind of policy that entails automatic, unquestionable punishment.
Stephen G.
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
Karen AKA Kajikit wrote:
I think everyone gets 'battle fatigue' occasionally. I stepped back for 3 weeks because I was getting steamingly mad over the way we argue things round and round in circles to the detriment of doing the real work.
Same here. The inability of the list to come to consensus is more wearying than edit wars.
The thing is, like it or not, the sysops ARE a defacto police force. It doesn't matter that we have the ability to make these changes because we asked for it. We care about the pedia enough to take action when necessary. And yes, I think that should include the temporary banning of people who repeatedly violate the code of conduct for the wikipedia. I agree with KQ about this - atm the code of conduct is unwritten,
well, no, it's not. we have plenty of pages about the nature of the project, the etiquette & so forth. Granted, many need a spring clean. We've cleaned up the FAQ pages, so maybe these will come next.
We shouldn't worry too much about Meatball's Life cycle page -- Wikipedia is unlike any other wiki. It is much larger, has much more traffic, and has different goals.
I like the idea of pointing offenders to policy pages. -- I suggested a "shoulder-tap" a while back, which would give the "offender" (loaded terminology, sorry) a clear message above *every edit box they saw* until they responded in some way. This wouldn't prevent them from editing, but one would hope that a *rational* and *intelligent* user would investigate, read up, and change their behaviour.
I am all for giving people benefit of the doubt, and assuming good faith. But if, after attempts at communication, people still persist in their behaviour, we should be quick to ban.
I fight to keep things open, not to tolerate anti-social behaviour, but to keep Wikipedia from becoming the online equivalent of a police state. I believe that soft security is the best way to run a wiki community, and that too much hard security will eventaully kill us.
If we lock down Wikipedia too tighly, we'll lose *most* of our great contributors.
Stephen G.
--- Daniel Mayer maveric149@yahoo.com wrote:
I hope we are all proud of ourselves about how tolerant we are with people who consistently exhibit anti-social behavior. Andre has left the project due to fatigue with having to deal with these miscreants and I am so /disgusted/ with loosing yet another great en.wiki contributor that for at least the next several days I am going to concentrate on the Spanish Wikipedia and contemplate priorities on my own future involvement in en.wiki.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ [Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
h
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
Well, I can't say I put myself in the "great contributors" category, but I'm ready to walk Real Soon Now. How long can you put up with the anti-social behavior which drives away those who are tired of being called names and having their work ruined by the anti-socials? Zoe Stephen Gilbert canuck_in_korea2002@yahoo.com wrote:I fight to keep things open, not to tolerate anti-social behaviour, but to keep Wikipedia from becoming the online equivalent of a police state. I believe that soft security is the best way to run a wiki community, and that too much hard security will eventaully kill us.
If we lock down Wikipedia too tighly, we'll lose *most* of our great contributors.
Stephen G.
--- Daniel Mayer wrote:
I hope we are all proud of ourselves about how tolerant we are with people who consistently exhibit anti-social behavior. Andre has left the project due to fatigue with having to deal with these miscreants and I am so /disgusted/ with loosing yet another great en.wiki contributor that for at least the next several days I am going to concentrate on the Spanish Wikipedia and contemplate priorities on my own future involvement in en.wiki.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ [Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
h
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ [Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
I hope we are all proud of ourselves about how tolerant we are with people who consistently exhibit anti-social behavior. Andre has left the project due to fatigue with having to deal with these miscreants and I am so /disgusted/ with loosing yet another great en.wiki contributor that for at least the next several days I am going to concentrate on the Spanish Wikipedia and contemplate priorities on my own future involvement in en.wiki.
Just for good order: It wasn't just these miscreants, although it's a large part of it. I am also getting sick of the fights between ourselves, and of getting hateful remarks from some of you. Furthermore, I have to spend less time on the Internet anyway, as my work is suffering under it.
I don't think I will be gone forever, but for the time being I'm going to do very little. Probably just a few new pages and major edits, those are what still gives me fun.
Someone says that I do not have to deal with them. And that's true. But once I have created a page or made a major addition to it, I get a bit attached to it. And when they get changed, I want to look. Most of the time it's something inconsequential. Often it is an improvement, and I smile. But sometimes it gets worse, and that upsets me. And then I try to work on it. That's one way to get drawn in. Unfortunately, there are others as well.
It's hard to say what, if anything, should have been done differently to keep me. Because it's certainly partly my own fault, being too thin-skinned, taking criticism too much personally, feeling personally insulted when there is really just a difference in opinion. Maybe my involvement in Wikipedia was just a case of having the right man at the wrong place - or a lot of wrong places even.
Like mav, I am withdrawing, to WikipediaNL in my case. I'll probably be back in some weeks or some months, and see what you have done with the project in the meantime. I wish you luck.
Andre Engels
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org