[Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

[Lars Gardenius]

The problem is that "howls of outraged anguish" seems to come from the admins not from the newbies.

But that was not the question here. The question was that the Wikis lack an instance that people can turn to when they are harassed and mobbed in the wikis, be that newbies or admins, children or old folks, women or men.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius




________________________________
 Von: Fred Bauder <fredbaud at fairpoint.net>
An: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org> 
Gesendet: 18:03 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself
 

Yes, that is pretty much the situation. The howls of outraged anguish
from those who were not able to dictate (really bad) content or practices
form the core of our organized opposition. That does not mean systemic
deficiencies don't exist; just that we must look and think in a noisy
environment.

Fred

> On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
>> That "Wikipedia:Dispute resolution" mirrors a very naive approach in a
>> worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
>> now.
>
> Where "doesn't work" is mostly defined as "didn't give the result I
> demanded".
>
> I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
> came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
> majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of "losing"
> to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.
>
> When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
> getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
> exactly what it's been designed for.
>
> Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
> convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
> side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
> concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
> ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
> and personality conflicts.
>
> There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
> occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from "the system didn't
> let me get my way" to "the system is broken/dying" is all to easy to
> make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.
>
> This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront might
> prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
> established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
> conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects of
> human nature...
>
> -- Marc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>