[WikiEN-l] Dangerous factionalism (Was: Re: SlimVirgin and CheckUser leaks)

[George Herbert]

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> Lar is foolish, IMO, to contribute to WR; it's a shifting mess of
> crazy and often malice, and I feel that listening and engaging with
> paranoids and obsessives to that degree can affect one's thinking.  On
> the other hand, I do not think he's doing so with any bad intent; I
> feel it has to do with a belief in engaging critics and listening
> impartially to all sides – noble intentions even if a bad idea in this
> case.

I've been looking in at the Arbcom case on the principals in the
pro/anti WR guerilla war going on on-wiki recently, thinking I wanted
to make a statement but somewhat afraid that there was no good time
and place.  This comment of Matthew's is prompting me to do so.

The situation regarding a number of our external critics, a number of
our external threats, and how wiki community members respond has
broken down rather badly and completely.  There is nothing more
dangerous for a community than two strong factions to form which have
both become shades of grey and who both completely distrust the
motives of the other one, and where civility breaks down.

We have a pair of double-edged swords in play.  Both the investigation
of legitimate external threats to the Wiki's stability and the
investigation of abuses within the community require investigators
(editors, admins, checkusers, arbcom members) who are aware and
engaged with problems, but who avoid falling into the dual traps of
either actually or apparently acting as proxies for internal or
external troublemakers.

The situation has led to senior editors and administrators at each
other's throats in an increasingly dangerous manner.

Before we proceed, I should disclose that I believe that I am somewhat
associated with one faction of this historically (both in perception
and reality) and have made mistakes in judgement associated with that
(a factual mistake that led to a questionable but rapidly reversed
block, for example, and having defended someone for a long time who in
retrospect clearly was abusing a lot of people's trusts).

I think that "the center" needs to reassert itself forcefully as to
what behavior is acceptable both in fighting legitimate external
threats and in questioning whether those fights are subverting
Wikipedia's goals and community.

I'll put something up in the arbcom case later, but let me posit this
- "the center" should look at everyone involved (at least as far out
as me on "my side", probably as far out as Larry and Allison, probably
as far out as Dan Tobias, Viridae, and certainly everyone more
involved than we are).  Determine whether the factions have become
sufficiently hostile to Wikipedia's community and goals that this
needs to end now, and take forceful action to end this.

It may be appropriate to ban the primary actors in both factions.

It may be appropriate to remove all admin rights from everyone
involved.  Myself certainly included.  I hope not Larry or Allison - I
personally have high regard for their support for the project and
community and their good judgement and use of the tools - but take an
honest look at everyone who's become wrapped up in the factionalism.

If you do not define a center and fight to hold it, this will devolve
into whomever can more effectively fight a long term guerilla war with
the resources at hand.  I put forth that this is already in play,
though few of us are fully aware of its scope or the roles that we've
been playing.

Arbcom and the Community have to put the stake in the ground and make
the center hold on this.


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