[WikiEN-l] Newbie and not-so-newbie biting

[Emily Monroe]

> When we see ex-wikipedians complaining about abusive admins, they  
> often didn't meet actual administrators, but self-appointed gate  
> keepers.

Any way to make admin status more obvious? I mean, I know being an  
admin isn't supposed to be a big deal, but obviously a newcomer (or  
even an oldcomer) may get mistake an experienced editor for an admin.   
This makes a difference in not only semantics, but the tasks that an  
editor would be expected to take on, etc.

> While we have always been very good at dealing with the obvious  
> negative consequence of "anyone can edit", vandalism, we have been  
> completely unable to reign in on the flip side of "anyone can be a  
> cop": bullies and people with a need talk down on others.

You're right. I know this is a controversial opinion, but I believe  
this to be a consequence of a consensus that "All civility blocks are  
bad". No. A few civility blocks might be bad, but civility blocks are  
needed.  I think this spills over into other consequences of being  
uncivil, like desyopping and civility parole. After all, any civility- 
related consequence is such a Big Deal that we need to leave that up  
to ArbCom.

> If a newbie somehow figures out how to complain about being bitten,  
> we assume he or she is a vandal until proven otherwise.

I personally try not to assume a newbie is a vandal--mistaken,  
perhaps, but not a vandal.  I can see people ABF toward newbies  
though, and that's frightening!

Emily
On Sep 18, 2009, at 10:04 AM, Apoc 2400 wrote:

>>
>> This isn't a new issue by any means, but here's a nice post by  
>> someone
>> who's been contributing occasionally since 2004, about how daunting
>> "wikibullying" can be for newbies and other editors who aren't
>> well-versed in the procedures and processes.
>>
>>
>> http://travel-industry.uptake.com/blog/2009/09/04/bullypedia-a-wikipedian-whos-tired-of-getting-beat-up/
>>
>> Unfriendliness is built into the system, even when admins and others
>> who enforce the rules are perfectly civil and try to be friendly at  
>> an
>> individual level.
>>
>
> This is really something everyone here should read.
>
> I think the problem is that on Wikipedia, anyone can be a cop. When  
> we see
> ex-wikipedians complaining about abusive admins, they often didn't  
> meet
> actual administrators, but self-appointed gate keepers. Just like open
> editing attracts a mix of good editors and vandals, open policing  
> attracts a
> mix of good administrators and people with a thirst for power. While  
> we have
> always been very good at dealing with the obvious negative  
> consequence of
> "anyone can edit", vandalism, we have been completely unable to  
> reign in on
> the flip side of "anyone can be a cop": bullies and people with a  
> need talk
> down on others.
>
> An overzelous rule-enforcer is still seen as a basically productive  
> member
> of the community. If a newbie somehow figures out how to complain  
> about
> being bitten, we assume he or she is a vandal until proven otherwise.
>
> In the beginning there was so much vandalism that we had to welcome  
> anyone
> willing to deal with it, whether their motivations were pure or not.  
> Over
> the past years the number of vandals and other simple troublemakers  
> has
> dropped and our technical means of dealing with them have improved.  
> We still
> have the army of hobby-cops and they aren't going to sit around  
> idle. So we
> get the situation that writer above faces.
>
> /Apoc2400
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l