[WikiEN-l] Missed Opportunities to have avoided the Durova Case

[Relata Refero]

>
>
> The cyberstalking list is in no way problematic.
>
> I know nothing about any "investigations list" and can't comment.  But
> in general, a list for investigations does not strike me as particularly
> problematic at all.  It could be a bad thing, depending on what is
> meant, but the name itself does not automatically mean badness.
>
> A good investigations list would be a quiet place where users could
> collect information and ask questions.
>
> "Say, this person looks like a sockpuppet..."
>
> "No, not really, check this out..."
>
> "Oh, ok."
>
> Nothing wrong with that, and in fact we need more of it. (IRC serves
> this function quite usefully in many cases.)
>

The problem is that this very sensible thing didn't happen. And  the reason
it didn't, it appears, is that most of the people on the list over-stress
the probability and the danger of a sockpuppet of a banned user appearing.
This is because bouncing ideas off people is only useful if it they have
sufficiently different ideas from you that they will disagree. In this case,
nobody seems to have responded to Durova's email. This might well be because
they were too detached from the regular editor's experience. Which is
precisely why using this sort of self-selected list is unhelpful at best,
and probably dangerous .
The true lesson: those who are hyper-concerned about infiltration by banned
users and the possibility of harassment should please step back a bit, and
realise that because they have been thinking about these people and this
problem so long and with such (possibly justified) passion, their judgment
might need recalibration. (This includes their judgment about what actions
are likely to reduce drama, and their judgment about the border between
expressing concerns not normally voiced in their hearing and trolling.)

RR