[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia Leadership (was NY Times article on gender gap in Wikipedia contributors} - repost

[wiki]

If you want a different editing environment, using a body like arbcom will
get you nowhere fast. You can't create a friendly environment by kneecapping
people who are uncivil - done like that it will either look like arbitrary
justice of people we don't like - or in the interest of transparency of
process you'll be reduced to counting sweary words. The problem with NPA is
that anyone with a good grasp of the English language knows how to deliver
an infuriating put-down, or frustrate by playing dumb-insolence, without
personally attacking anyone. On the other hand, we end up blocking someone
for calling a troll "a troll".  

What you need is something else. I'm not Jimbo's biggest fan, and I'm never
greatly taken by his idealistic "Jimbofluff" approach, but when you actually
had a leader (who at that time was perceived to have influence) those who
wanted to have influence with him, would strive not to disappoint the
leader. That ethos rubs off. Jimmy was very good at saying to people he
valued, "I'm disappointed with how you handled this" - and it stung.

The problem with arbcom is that it although people may seek to avoid
behavior which might lead to sanctions, there's little positive
reinforcement. Unless one is angling to be elected (or still needs to pass
RfA) then having, and expressing contempt, for all and sundry doesn't have
consequences. I speak from experience here. I've battled for BLP issues for
years, to do that I've had to fight for unpopular positions, and I've needed
to know arbcom will support me.- That I am often overly-combatative, short
tempered, and unnecessarily uncivil, ends up being beside the point -as
arbcom would look very petty were they to pass a critical resolution in the
midst of dealing with important issues. A leader(ship) would find it easier
to say "thank you, you're right, we should do this, but please could you
tone it down a bit".

If you want a atmosphere change it needs led, and not driven by threats. It
is also the case that much of the incivility of regulars is due to long-term
frustration caused by the fact that getting any small change on en.Wikipedia
means battle and endless debates with hundreds of people. The problem is
structural - change (when it comes) is driven and not lead - so you learn to
fight and equally you get frustrated.  

As hard as it is to change structures, it is far easier to change structures
than to change people. And structures shape people.

But we've discussed structural change time and time again, and it can't
happen. The bastards won't let it, so sod the lot of them.

Scott (Doc)