[Gendergap] Hello and a (small!) manifesto

[Fred Bauder]

>> OK, but let's get down to cases. What should we do about it? Think
>> ahead
>> to community reaction, but assume, in good faith, that he is doing his
>> best and could do better. (or is that just a game of going through the
>> motions?)
>
> This has now played out more or less as I thought it would: He has twice
> said he doesn't care, it's not his problem, and after some other
> discussion
> by other editors which he decided wasn't involving him he's removed the
> section from his talk page entirely.

I need to look at this more and also take a good look at his current
behavior.

>
> I emailed him saying that was his prerogative and his position was clear,
> but that I might stop in and audit his patrol log and contributions on
> occasion in the future.
>
> I'm glad the distraction is over so I can return to doing more
> content-related editing, as I have some long-range plans. However, things
> like this will happen again with this editor, and others like him.
>
> It doesn't surprise me that Wikipedia would attract such serious Asperger
> cases as this. The phenomenon of indivudals with poor social skills
> (mostly,
> to be fair, male) finding a haven online where singlemindedly obsessive
> behavior can be of benefit, as it often is especially on Wikipedia, is
> not
> new to Wikipedia.

I'm not comfortable about running everyone off with mild disabilities,
although we are prepared to do so in individual cases based on chronic
disruption.

Diagnoses of the sort you are making are inappropriate, however, even in
our closed lists. None of us are qualified to do so, and even if we were,
have had no opportunity to evaluate him in an appropriate way.

>
> Frankly, Tim's fault wasn't his alone. The original article he marked had
> not included the code that makes footnotes show up
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Swim_~&oldid=362817720).

This:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Swim_~&diff=next&oldid=362819754

adding {{hasty}} to the hatnotes, however, is evidence that our system
worked in this case.

> Now
> that, of course, doesn't mean it should be deleted. And in fact it wasn't
> ... the subsequent work on the article resulted in the tag being removed
> (the only deletion in the record is from a previous incarnation, in
> 2008).
> But reviewing admins should be careful about this, and Tim's absolute
> refusal to discuss this when asked, even in a less confrontational way,
> is a
> cause for concern.
>
> First, these things are not always evident in the Twinkle or Huggle user
> interface. That's a technical issue.
>

We need to follow up on that observation.

> But given the mentality expressed by his userpage and discussions
> initiated,
> it's clear that the benign neglect from the rest of the community has
> allowed the evolution of a space within Wikipedia where users like this,
> users who actually flaunt their antisocial tendencies, can thrive under
> the
> cover of a necessary project function.

We are aware of this problem, which arose quite early on. A number of
such users are banned, but they are often quite upset about it and may
continue to pester us for years.

>
> Clearly greater oversight is needed.

We can always do better but going overboard is not wise either.

>
> Daniel Case

Respectfully,

Fred Bauder