[WikiEN-l] Disgusting behavior on AN:I

[Marc Riddell]

>> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 09:04:28 -0400, Marc Riddell
>> <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Keep in mind, Mark, WE teach people how to treat us. And, when shouting is
>>> met with silence, all that's left is the echo.

>> On 7/12/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:

>> I wish.  What is left is the endless repetition of "see, he had no
>> answer to this! I was right!" posted to every single place the
>> disgruntled troll can find.

> on 7/12/07 10:23 PM, George Herbert at george.herbert at gmail.com wrote:

> No.  It's not that simple.
> 
> With all due respect to MONGO, and I respect him a lot, there's a
> reason that he's attracted ten times more flak than the next most
> controversial good guy.
> 
> His interactions with the trolls, and the snipes he takes at them, are
> part of a vicious circle.  He's antagonized by them, he antagonizes
> them.
> 
> Unfortunately, his objective in editing Wikipedia is not to frustrate
> them.  Their objective is to frustrate him, because he blows up so
> spectacularly when provoked.  They think it's fun.
> 
> The only ways that this ends are either with him leaving the project,
> complaining that we didn't defend him enough, or he learns how to not
> engage the trolls.  As long as he's an attractive and reactive target,
> he will never get away from it.
> 
> Lacking the apparent power or authority to effectively permanently ban
> (identify, and ban) every person who seeks to troll him or poke at him
> somehow, we can't solve the problem for him.
> 
> There's a difference between blaming the victim, and observing that
> the victim and victimizers are trapped in a behavioral loop.
> Defending him doesn't mean that we should never take a step back, look
> at the situation, and observe such behavioral interactions.  In fact,
> defending him effectively demands it.
> 
> He has become his own worst enemy; the attackers aren't able to
> actually cause him harm, but they cause him to blow up in arguments on
> ANI and so forth which do serious damage, over and over again.
> 
> I want him to stay, and be a productive editor, and eventually maybe
> he'll want admin bit back.  I think success in those endeavors
> ultimately depends on having a few more of "us" try and talk him out
> of the response behaviors that keep him in the EDers crosshairs.  I'm
> proving spectacularly ineffective at pointing it out to him, probably
> because of our history.  It would help if more of you joined in.

George, I would like to join in. But I came somewhat late to all of this and
know very little about MONGO's situation, and virtually nothing about MONGO
himself. Would someone fill me me in (preferably, you, MONGO)?

Marc Riddell