[WikiEN-l] The Counter Vandalism Unit? Whaa?
fastfission at gmail.com
Fri Feb 3 21:50:05 UTC 2006
On 2/3/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> I ask those who support the CVU: 1) how does it help Wikipedia in ways
> that a non-organisational structure couldn't?
Organization always is more productive than lack thereof. In theory an
organized approached to watching for vandalism should work better than
an unorganized one. Wikipedia is highly organized. It's a flexible
organization, and entirely voluntary, but it's organized. This list is
a form of organization. So are administators, arbcom, featured
articles, collaborations of the week, village pump, and, my favorite,
and 2) is the good it
> does really more significant than the dislike it creates among other
I don't have any way to quantify this. Honestly I didn't even know
there were people who spent time worrying about these things until
this thread. I've never been struck either way by it. Have they be
infringing on the rights of others? Have they been colluding to do
anything negative to the encyclopedia? If not, then I say lay off. If
it's just a matter of your personal interpretation of what their name
implies, I'd first have to wonder how common it was. I never came away
with the conclusions you did.
I might also say that I also don't see any evidence that vandalism has
increased in the face of anti-vandalism efforts. And anti-vandalism
efforts, in my understanding of the term, simply means monitoring for
vandalism, undoing vandalism, and blocking repeat offenders. What's so
wrong about that? What's so wrong about organizing that?
More information about the WikiEN-l