[WikiEN-l] Self-sensorship, how far should it go?

[Michael Noda]

On 8/1/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/07, John Lee <johnleemk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'll second everything Bryan says. I don't agree that Jay, ElinorD, et al,
> > ought to take a wikibreak, but we do need to take a step back and chill out.
>
> Huh? What does this have to do with me? I thought Andrew was
> suggesting the people who insist on discussing this on the list and on
> Wikipedia should take a break.

On 8/1/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 01/08/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't see any good coming from giving into trolls and stalkers. The
> > > fact that a bunch of disgruntled, mostly banned ex-Wikipedians like to
> > > spin conspiracy theories, and occasionally disrupt Wikipedia, should
> > > simply be ignored. Not discussed on Wikipedia, not discussed here,
> > > just ignored.
> >
> > "Ignored" is one thing. "Silenced" just feeds the fire.
> >
> > I note this thread began because a debate about Slim's identity, and
> > the massive efforts gone to to conceal edits associated with her, *was
> > on the front page of slashdot*. (Slashdot. Not Wikipedia Review, or
> > Encyclopedia Dramatica, or anyone else; Slashdot, perhaps a classic
> > example of our "natural supporters".) This led to a large amount of
> > curiosity amongst our community. But a small group of people cracked
> > down heavily on anyone trying to say "what the fuck is going on here?"
> > on the wiki... which just further encouraged speculation about those
> > efforts to conceal something.
> >
> > If you honestly don't see that this sort of behaviour is wasteful,
> > counterproductive, inflammatory and - in the long run - just poisoning
> > our reputation, then I am afraid my complaints are hopeless. But, by
> > god, they were worth making.
> >
> > At some point in the past, people fucked up, made enemies or handled
> > something badly or just been unlucky in who they dealt with. Things
> > have moved on, and developed, and we're now in a situation where they
> > have no choice but to look foolish, or keep harming the project. The
> > only reasonable solution here is for them to stop and walk away.
> > Sooner or later, they have to realise this.
> >
> > I will say it again - the people we are looking bad to now aren't the
> > people who already thought the worst of us. We're now beginning to
> > look like incompetent spiteful twerps to neutral third parties, and I
> > see no indication it's ever going to improve. Essjay got us faintly
> > amused newspaper coverage - what will "Wikipedia Covers Up Unknown
> > Misdemeanours" look like?
> >
> > The project is bigger than them, it is more important than a username,
> > and I will not stand by to see it dragged down to protect their pride.
>
> Frankly, I don't really know what you're talking about any more,
> Andrew. The people who look bad are those promoting this nonsense, and
> those who insist on continually re-hashing it on Wikipedia and the
> mailing list. Enough navel-gazing; go build an encyclopedia.

Jay, the "who, me?" attitude you are taking is getting tiresome.  Do
you really not realize the damage you have done to your own
reputation, and the project's?  Either you do, in which case your
continuing to be inflammatory towards fellow editors and trolls alike
is inexcusable, or you do not, in which case you have not yet heard
the patient explanations and pleas of your fellow editors.

Assuming the latter:  Your actions have been counter-productive to any
goals you may have had in mind while taking them.  The endless
discussions that you help generate are drowning out useful
collaboration internally, and advocacy and goodwill for the project
externally.  While the long service you have given this project is
vast and will always be appreciated, I for one can no longer in good
conscience ask you to stay; both you and the project need for you to
step back, and let fresher hands take up your work.  Go, with our
blessing.