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

[FT2]

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 9:48 PM, George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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
>




Broadly, concur. Though unsure the best response. Ban all would be a bit
draconian. It would need considerable thought whether it was resolvable by
any lesser means than deciding "you you and you are major players on both
sides, consider yourself temp banned".



FT2