[WikiEN-l] WikiAbuse gone

[George Herbert]

On 7/13/07, Steven Walling <steven.walling at gmail.com> wrote:
> "a kindlier, gentler attack site"? That's supposed to be a defence? It's
> like saying some Nazis weren't as bad as Goering.
>
> I'm not defending the validity of the lawsuit. What I was criticizing is an
> attack on those who criticise a site built for the express purpose of
> criticism. Saying that WA has the right to snipe at every little action
> taken by admins, and then calling those who give equally harsh criticism of
> WA "cowards" is obvious hypocrisy. Aren't the cowards those who build an
> entire separate, anonymous apparatus for taking potshots (even useful ones)
> at admins the cowards? Why not have some balls and try and affect a real,
> lasting change from within Wikipedia, rather than running away and creating
> a space for disgruntled users to tell their sob story without any
> opportunity for rebuttal?

Well, sorta out of order...

It really wasn't any more or less anonymous than Wikipedia is.

It's always useful for groups to have useful external criticism, and
avenues for that to happen.  It's not cowardly for some people to go
do that; it's necessary for there to be gadflys and external critics
for the group to succeed in the long term.  The "either play in our
sandbox or go home" attitude is pretty naive... it won't happen that
way, and should not.

WA was, when I was watching, making no small effort to keep the
discussion at an adult level.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com