[WikiEN-l] Can sweet reason still work on en:wp? Occasionally.

[Ryan Delaney]

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:36 PM, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:

> If there's confusion about IAR, I think it helps a lot to think of it
> as Ignore All Procedures. IAR doesn't get you off the hook for a
> non-NPOV article; it does mean that you can ignore whatever crazy
> procedures there are to fix this problem if they are unhelpful to you.
> (But if they are helpful, or you're not sure what to do, then by all
> means use them).
>
>
My problem with arguments critical of IAR is that they usually follow this
formula:

1. Implicitly assume on the basis of a few one-off cases where IAR was
invoked abusively that IAR is in any sense a "get out of jail free" card for
abusive behavior, or that it's a free pass for anyone to do whatever he or
she wants without having to explain why that was better for the encyclopedia
or to ignore mounting consensus that what he or she did was in fact a Bad
Idea(tm)

2. Reiterate the blindingly obvious and never contested fact that people
need to make editorial decisions on the basis of good reasons instead of
"willy nilly"

3. Conclude on the above basis that IAR should itself be ignored and that
the only solution to the pressing problem of human autonomy and the
inevitability of mistakes and disagreements is not discussion and dispute
resolution, but instead a rigid formalized approach to policy that
emphasizes firm rules that are to be followed at all times on pain of Death.

Anybody who thinks that IAR is going to get them off the hook for abusive
editing is a fool. We all know that. If there is someone out there who
thinks they can invoke IAR to ignore social feedback from peers who are
telling them that they should stop doing what they are doing, I'll be there
to repudiate that. But what I can't grok is why this obvious fact is so
often the basis for criticisms of an interpretation of IAR that is totally
out of alignment with its fundamental message, and why we therefore lose
sight of that message. The real message of IAR is fundamental to this
project as it's covered in the fifth pillar: mistakes will be made, but
they're mostly easy to fix; contributing to Wikipedia should be easy and
fun; and so we don't need a rule to cover every possible eventuality.

- causa sui