[WikiEN-l] Why are veterans so militant of late; The Future. (was Bus Uncle)

[Joe Szilagyi]

I've always believed that eventually, a sort of seismic shift would be
noticeable on Wikipedia where a certain tipping point was reached.
Eventually, the number of both active users and active admins would reach a
point where any individual voice was completely lost in the crowd, on a
consistent and constant basis. We're not there yet--not by a long shot. But
it's now, if not on the immediate horizon, only a few rotations of the
seasons away. Evidence:

1. [[WP:ANI]]. This, xfD, and AIV are arguably the busiest places on-Wiki.
ANI, for a sole centralized place, IS the most centralized. So much so,
that's spawned numerous spin-off pages to handle the load. We have ANI, AN,
BLPN, CSN, AIV, tons. Despite this, the rotation and archiving on ANI
*still* has to be already set to 24 hours now. Remember two years ago? A
year ago? Remember how much quieter that part of the pond used to be?

2. User counts. There are unquestionably many more users on Wikipedia--and
vocal editors--than when I started. The community overall has *never* been
this busy. The busier it gets, the busier it will get in turn, which will
lead to ever more admins...

3. Admin counts. Look at RFA--there are a dozen people practically up now
for nominations at any given time, and virtually all are promoted. I predict
we'll see 20 open RfAs at one time by the next midwinter, or spring 2008 at
the absolute latest.

4. Knee-jerk over-reactions. In my last email, I said (rather indelicately,
unfortunately):

On 6/5/07, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I still assert quite well that the "old timers" going nuts of late, trying
> to forcefully close down discussion on various matters, is a *direct*
> reaction to the fact that Wikipedia has now grown beyond their perceived
> personal control, and the fact that any one individual or small clique each
> day, each week, and each passing month will grow ever more irrelevant and
> obscure. Where a lone senior editor or admin or three previously had
> tremendous power, that is no longer the case, and many people are willing to
> challenge them--and successfully. I saw that even a beaurocrat on the
> Armedblowfish RFA was reverted, and told to knock it off by a group of
> editors for overstepping the bounds of his role.
>
> This is, overall, a good thing in the long term--the more the community
> collectively drives matters, the more irrational and extremist voices on any
> and all sides will be drowned out, swept away, and largely ignored as they
> gnash their teeth and wail at the walls. Within 1-3 years, the current
> 'leaders' of the community--no offense, guys, you brought us here, after
> all--will need to adjust to the fact that they're just "another user". I
> think the hyper-aggressive tone is evidence of this--the, "Discussion is
> over" sorts of proclamations and whatnot.
>


On the one hand, any and all people "in power" will be de-valued if this
occurs. Your voice, my voice--we're just one more person in the crowd if
this comes to pass. No one person will be able to ram anything, good or bad,
theoretically down Wikipedia's throat as it happens now all too frequently.
Appealing to populism will be how things will need to get done. The mass
titanic shifts with BLP currently underway--where a very small minority of
users are very aggressively trying to change the tone of something more to
their suiting... will be impossibly harder to get to stick. On the other
hand, populist ideas--BADSITES, anyone?--will be able to gain traction
easily. It's the equivalent of screaming "9/11" during a political rally;
people will stand up and cheer simply because you said 9/11. This will open
Wikipedia to all manner of possible disruption, unless the crowd is able to
see it for what it is. On the other hand, *good* populist ideas could spread
just as quickly and correctly. But lone people or ultra-minority groups
screaming "BLP NINJA ATTACK! BADSITES! TRUTHERS CONSPIRACIES! FLAVOR OF THE
DAY CONTROVERSY!" will be relegated to the back of the room, patted on the
head, and told to stop disrupting.

If this happens, will it be a good thing? If not, why not?

Regards,
Joe
http://www.joeszilagyi.com