[WikiEN-l] Another admin burnout

[Michael Noda]

On Dec 19, 2007 11:34 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/20/07, Todd Allen <toddmallen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have tried to look back through some of the previous implosions,
> > though. I find that one extremely common thread is that the person tends
> > to become progressively more brusque, hostile, and nonresponsive, and
> > tends to respond to questions or criticism either by ignoring it or by
> > attacking the questioner.
>
> This sounds like a standard response to a person becoming stressed due
> to more and more demands being placed on them and less margin for
> error. People get terse and aggressive when they feel that they have a
> big workload and no one to share it with. In the case of our admins,
> there are so many pressures now: problems to solve, but also a lot of
> "don't do this, don't do that". Attempting to navigate all these
> pitfalls while watching out for trolls is likely to do anyone's head
> in.
>
> > For most admins, though, a marked change in the way they react to people
> > (especially toward the negative) should be a good reason for someone to
> > gently suggest they take a voluntary and temporary break from the tools
> > before they're given an involuntary and permanent one. Ideally, this
> > would be someone the person knows and trusts, and that the person being
> > given the advice would be hesitant to simply brush off as a troll or a
> > fool. As to those trusted people, the best thing you can do for those
> > you trust and care for is to be honest with them, even when that honesty
> > might sting a little.
>
> I don't know that a temporary break solves much in these situations,
> if the underlying causes haven't changed.

Oftentimes, people who have been around awhile develop the feeling
that they, personally, are indispensable to the project; that they are
part of the last line of defence against trolls, or vandals, or
nationalist POV pushers, or whatever menace the person in question has
taken up the tools against. It seems to get worse the more tools one
has; normal editors are less susceptible to this thinking than admins,
who are in turn less susceptible than checkusers and oversights.
(Bureaucrats have been relatively immune to this, both because they no
longer have any emergency actions to take since desysoppings were
shifted to the stewards, and because theirs is the one task that is
genuinely not backlogged.)

A break, at least in theory, should demonstrate to a stressed-out
person that others will rise in her place and keep the project going
if she doesn't do everything herself.  Unfortunately, sometimes
confirmation bias means that the person on break sees things going to
hell in their absence, regardless of whether or not that's actually
the case.  Also, sometimes the demonstration of dispensability can
cause the person to finally snap, if their own sense of importance to
the project was what was driving them in the first place.  I'm torn,
as to exactly what I should feel about that, since a sense of
importance to the project is one of the few reward mechanisms we have
to offer, but it's not in itself helpful.