Re: [WikiEN-l] NPR on Roth-Library Link of the Day
On 09/11/12 8:23 AM, Nathan wrote: That comment sounds like it was written by Peter Damian. Not everyone, even Wikipedians, recognize or keep in mind the fact that there is a subversive principle (or really, many) underlying the Wikipedia model. It intentionally does not offer deference to editors with credentials in the fields they might choose to edit. There are obvious practical reasons for this, but there's also an element of democratizing information and the curation of knowledge. This strikes many self-defined experts as wrongheaded; they expect to be treated as authorities, and are often upset when they are not. While unfortunate, that doesn't turn this feature of Wikipedia into a bug. If anything it suggests we need to do a better job educating potential editors and readers about the principles of the encyclopedia. The subversive principle lies in making reality a victim of group-think. This subjects truth to a wholly flawed mechanism of verification that is immune to any kind of reality check. Wikipedia has a perverse history when it comes to dealing with expertise. It substitutes it's own bureaucracy for recognized experts in a field. These admins are the wrongheaded self-defined experts that expect to be treated as authorities. In circumstances of law they are quite willing to evade responsibility with a strategic "IANAL" while they run to the acknowledged experts in that field. Understanding and good judgement are not the product of rules. If we note the wording, "There’s no way Roth could have tackled this subject without thinking of Anatole Broyard," It doesn't state Broyard's influence it speculates about it. The innuendo works for all but the most careful readers. In the underlying incident instead of treating the word "spook" in its ordinary meaning of a ghost, the crowd willfully mischaracterizes the word in a more obscure sense. In the famed Seigenthaler incident the writer did not make a blunt claim that Seigenthaler had been involved in the Kennedy assassination, he merely stated that he had been cleared of any such charges. That claim may have been outright vandalism, but, judging by the reaction, it was effective. How we fail to read accurately is frequently a big problem. I tend to be very critical of experts in any field. I still like to give them the prima facie benefit of the doubt in the absence of evidence to the contrary, or other basis of conflict. Similarly, I also read "reliable sources" with the same criticality. Needing "to do a better job educating potential editors" sounds to much like the politician who thinks that the only reason the public hasn't agreed with views is that he hasn't explained them well enough. It doesn't occur to him that there might be something wrong with his views, nor to us that our epistemology might be flawed. Ray ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] NPR on Roth-Library Link of the Day
On 11 September 2012 16:23, Nathan wrote: > That comment sounds like it was written by Peter Damian. Not everyone, > even Wikipedians, recognize or keep in mind the fact that there is a > subversive principle (or really, many) underlying the Wikipedia model. > It intentionally does not offer deference to editors with credentials > in the fields they might choose to edit. There are obvious practical > reasons for this, but there's also an element of democratizing > information and the curation of knowledge. > > This strikes many self-defined experts as wrongheaded; they expect to > be treated as authorities, and are often upset when they are not. > While unfortunate, that doesn't turn this feature of Wikipedia into a > bug. If anything it suggests we need to do a better job educating > potential editors and readers about the principles of the > encyclopedia. > > The anti-expert idea is not really related to "democratizing information and the curation of knowledge." Especially as Wikipedia specifically identifies as *not a democracy*! The point in not deferring to experts is a hack to get around the problem that on the internet you could claim to be just about anyone. Who knows if you truly are an expert in theology (*cough* Essjay *cough*). However; it's a bad hack because in many fields you need to be an expert to be able to properly write about the subject. I have a deep interest in religious history; you couldn't call me an expert, but I have studied the subject to undergraduate level in my spare time. I look at the editors working on religious history topics on Wikipedia and they are, often, incapable of scholarly authorship, or driven by their own viewpoints. This is just one data point. The "all editors created equal" thing is a misnomer; being an admin people *do* defer to me, even though I try to avoid it. I see many admins using their authority. So perhaps it is time to allow experts to be seen as such. Tom ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Pedants welcome
Catchphrase from http://infteam.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2012/09/10/eduwiki/ which in itself is an interesting roundup from the EduWiki conference last week. Does "pedants welcome" imply "experts unwelcome"? Please have your essays in by the end of the weekend. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
> > > Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 17:34:26 +0100 > From: Thomas Dalton > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment > > On 11 September 2012 17:29, Fred Bauder wrote: > > It seems I have not posed this as a question. The question is how could > > we better handle VIP subjects who give us feedback, attempt to edit > > either themselves or through an agent, or contact OTRS? > > > > For example, could we assign some diplomatic people to handle such > > situations, I've noticed CBS does that. It's a skill. > > We have assigned diplomatic people to handle such situations - they're > the OTRS volunteers. The problem is how we make sure people get > directed to OTRS. > > One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as representative of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as being dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective at changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with protecting territory than having accurate information. Even more fundamentally, WP admins are not accountable for doing a good job, only avoiding doing a bad one. Until that changes, most admins have little incentive to be anything beyond mediocre. Sure, I believe they generally mean well, but if they think they're right, why shouldn't they be rude and drive off the annoying editor who says they're wrong, rather than waste a bunch of time trying to be helpful and diplomatic. They can be as rude and territorial as they want, provided they don't cross the line into "abusing the tools", and no-one will punish them, so why should they bother politely pointing someone to OTRS, much less spend time and effort trying to be diplomatic themselves? Sxeptomaniac ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On 12 September 2012 16:50, Matthew Jacobs wrote: > > > > > > Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 17:34:26 +0100 > > From: Thomas Dalton > > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment > > > > On 11 September 2012 17:29, Fred Bauder wrote: > > > It seems I have not posed this as a question. The question is how could > > > we better handle VIP subjects who give us feedback, attempt to edit > > > either themselves or through an agent, or contact OTRS? > > > > > > For example, could we assign some diplomatic people to handle such > > > situations, I've noticed CBS does that. It's a skill. > > > > We have assigned diplomatic people to handle such situations - they're > > the OTRS volunteers. The problem is how we make sure people get > > directed to OTRS. > > > > > One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as representative > of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as being > dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large > portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective at > changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with > protecting territory than having accurate information. > It's certainly easy to draw conclusions if you include them in the premises of the argument. > Even more fundamentally, WP admins are not accountable for doing a good > job, only avoiding doing a bad one. Until that changes, most admins have > little incentive to be anything beyond mediocre. Sure, I believe they > generally mean well, but if they think they're right, why shouldn't they be > rude and drive off the annoying editor who says they're wrong, rather than > waste a bunch of time trying to be helpful and diplomatic. They can be as > rude and territorial as they want, provided they don't cross the line into > "abusing the tools", and no-one will punish them, so why should they bother > politely pointing someone to OTRS, much less spend time and effort trying > to be diplomatic themselves? > > Ditto. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On 12 September 2012 16:50, Matthew Jacobs wrote: > One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as representative > of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as being > dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large > portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective at > changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with > protecting territory than having accurate information. I think that's a bit of an inside view. The outside world can't tell an admin from a non-admin, there aren't generally little tags on people's sigs. So the problem is more general dickishness, not specifically admin dickishness. As far as I can tell, outsiders like to have someone central to approach, e.g. the email address. (I vaguely understand someone gave Roth/his biographer the wrong answer, i.e. needing a secondary source rather than a referenceable self-statement. That's a different problem, of course.) - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On 12 September 2012 17:08, David Gerard wrote: > On 12 September 2012 16:50, Matthew Jacobs wrote: > > > One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as representative > > of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as > being > > dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large > > portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective at > > changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with > > protecting territory than having accurate information. > > > I think that's a bit of an inside view. The outside world can't tell > an admin from a non-admin, there aren't generally little tags on > people's sigs. So the problem is more general dickishness, not > specifically admin dickishness. > > As far as I can tell, outsiders like to have someone central to > approach, e.g. the email address. > > (I vaguely understand someone gave Roth/his biographer the wrong > answer, i.e. needing a secondary source rather than a referenceable > self-statement. That's a different problem, of course.) > > > - d. > > I figured out where; there is also UTRS (note the U) which is a separately maintained support tool (staffed by English Wikipedia admins) for requesting unblocks. We probably need to look into how people are filtered to these things. (I also am not sure why we have UTRS over OTRS, and why the participants are not told to pass such issues onto OTRS who are more experienced in handling them). Tom ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
UTRS was created because handling ip unblock requests on OTRS would violate our privacy policy On Sep 12, 2012 6:17 PM, "Thomas Morton" wrote: > On 12 September 2012 17:08, David Gerard wrote: > > > On 12 September 2012 16:50, Matthew Jacobs > wrote: > > > > > One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as > representative > > > of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as > > being > > > dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large > > > portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective > at > > > changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with > > > protecting territory than having accurate information. > > > > > > I think that's a bit of an inside view. The outside world can't tell > > an admin from a non-admin, there aren't generally little tags on > > people's sigs. So the problem is more general dickishness, not > > specifically admin dickishness. > > > > As far as I can tell, outsiders like to have someone central to > > approach, e.g. the email address. > > > > (I vaguely understand someone gave Roth/his biographer the wrong > > answer, i.e. needing a secondary source rather than a referenceable > > self-statement. That's a different problem, of course.) > > > > > > - d. > > > > > I figured out where; there is also UTRS (note the U) which is > a separately maintained support tool (staffed by English Wikipedia admins) > for requesting unblocks. > > We probably need to look into how people are filtered to these things. > > (I also am not sure why we have UTRS over OTRS, and why the participants > are not told to pass such issues onto OTRS who are more experienced in > handling them). > > Tom > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On 12 September 2012 17:16, Thomas Morton wrote: > I figured out where; there is also UTRS (note the U) which is > a separately maintained support tool (staffed by English Wikipedia admins) > for requesting unblocks. > We probably need to look into how people are filtered to these things. > (I also am not sure why we have UTRS over OTRS, and why the participants > are not told to pass such issues onto OTRS who are more experienced in > handling them). Roth's biographer emailed this UTRS? Aaargh. (Just spoke to someone from the Sunday Times about the Roth issue. I characterised it as a series of miscommunications and an instance of the general problem of people not knowing how to approach Wikipedia about problems in an article about them. I did note a couple of times that we were discussing the problem intensely at length, trying to work out how we could do better next time, and that we don't yet have an elegant solution to the general problem. Hopefully some of that will make it to print.) -d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
How exactly? On OTRS we handle much more sensitive private info :-) Tom Morton On 12 Sep 2012, at 17:26, Martijn Hoekstra wrote: > UTRS was created because handling ip unblock requests on OTRS would violate > our privacy policy > On Sep 12, 2012 6:17 PM, "Thomas Morton" > wrote: > >> On 12 September 2012 17:08, David Gerard wrote: >> >>> On 12 September 2012 16:50, Matthew Jacobs >> wrote: >>> One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as >> representative of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as >>> being dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective >> at changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with protecting territory than having accurate information. >>> >>> >>> I think that's a bit of an inside view. The outside world can't tell >>> an admin from a non-admin, there aren't generally little tags on >>> people's sigs. So the problem is more general dickishness, not >>> specifically admin dickishness. >>> >>> As far as I can tell, outsiders like to have someone central to >>> approach, e.g. the email address. >>> >>> (I vaguely understand someone gave Roth/his biographer the wrong >>> answer, i.e. needing a secondary source rather than a referenceable >>> self-statement. That's a different problem, of course.) >>> >>> >>> - d. >>> >>> >> I figured out where; there is also UTRS (note the U) which is >> a separately maintained support tool (staffed by English Wikipedia admins) >> for requesting unblocks. >> >> We probably need to look into how people are filtered to these things. >> >> (I also am not sure why we have UTRS over OTRS, and why the participants >> are not told to pass such issues onto OTRS who are more experienced in >> handling them). >> >> Tom >> ___ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
I have no idea, but legal was sure. On Sep 12, 2012 6:28 PM, "Thomas Morton" wrote: > How exactly? On OTRS we handle much more sensitive private info :-) > > Tom Morton > > On 12 Sep 2012, at 17:26, Martijn Hoekstra > wrote: > > > UTRS was created because handling ip unblock requests on OTRS would > violate > > our privacy policy > > On Sep 12, 2012 6:17 PM, "Thomas Morton" > > wrote: > > > >> On 12 September 2012 17:08, David Gerard wrote: > >> > >>> On 12 September 2012 16:50, Matthew Jacobs > >> wrote: > >>> > One problem with that approach is that OTRS is not seen as > >> representative > of WP; the administrators are. If the admins are widely perceived as > >>> being > dicks (probably because way to many of them behave like dicks a large > portion of the time), then OTRS is going to continue to be ineffective > >> at > changing the perception of WP as unfriendly and more concerned with > protecting territory than having accurate information. > >>> > >>> > >>> I think that's a bit of an inside view. The outside world can't tell > >>> an admin from a non-admin, there aren't generally little tags on > >>> people's sigs. So the problem is more general dickishness, not > >>> specifically admin dickishness. > >>> > >>> As far as I can tell, outsiders like to have someone central to > >>> approach, e.g. the email address. > >>> > >>> (I vaguely understand someone gave Roth/his biographer the wrong > >>> answer, i.e. needing a secondary source rather than a referenceable > >>> self-statement. That's a different problem, of course.) > >>> > >>> > >>> - d. > >>> > >>> > >> I figured out where; there is also UTRS (note the U) which is > >> a separately maintained support tool (staffed by English Wikipedia > admins) > >> for requesting unblocks. > >> > >> We probably need to look into how people are filtered to these things. > >> > >> (I also am not sure why we have UTRS over OTRS, and why the participants > >> are not told to pass such issues onto OTRS who are more experienced in > >> handling them). > >> > >> Tom > >> ___ > >> WikiEN-l mailing list > >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > >> > > ___ > > WikiEN-l mailing list > > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
> why should they > bother > politely pointing someone to OTRS, much less spend time and effort trying > to be diplomatic themselves? > > Sxeptomaniac Because they are decent capable people, take pride in doing a good job, and are concerned about the accuracy and reputation of Wikipedia. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
> As far as I can tell, outsiders like to have someone central to > approach, e.g. the email address. > - d. VIPs expect to deal with another VIP, with authority to get things fixed, with a word, even if the rules have to be bent a bit. That is the way of the world. We, particularly a random community member they are interacting with, often do not have authority to do what has to be done. They do not understand or appreciate discussions with the community about their problem. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
> How exactly? On OTRS we handle much more sensitive private info :-) > > Tom Morton Checkuser may be employed in either instance if there is a good reason, such as an apparent sock puppet or abuse of multiple accounts. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: > VIPs expect to deal with another VIP, with authority to get things fixed, > with a word, even if the rules have to be bent a bit. That is the way of > the world. We, particularly a random community member they are > interacting with, often do not have authority to do what has to be done. > They do not understand or appreciate discussions with the community about > their problem. For what it's worth, this is not just a VIP behavior. Most people assume that Wikipedia has centralized control over content, and they want Someone In Charge to fix things for them. (cf. all the people who e-mail Jimbo asking him to make changes, or the people who volunteer for OTRS because they want to fix errors on pages) It's difficult to correct these assumptions, even after pointing out the big "edit" tab at the top of nearly every page. -- Jim Redmond [[User:Jredmond]] ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On 12 September 2012 18:32, Jim Redmond wrote: > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Fred Bauder >wrote: > > > VIPs expect to deal with another VIP, with authority to get things fixed, > > with a word, even if the rules have to be bent a bit. That is the way of > > the world. We, particularly a random community member they are > > interacting with, often do not have authority to do what has to be done. > > They do not understand or appreciate discussions with the community about > > their problem. > > > For what it's worth, this is not just a VIP behavior. Most people assume > that Wikipedia has centralized control over content, and they want Someone > In Charge to fix things for them. (cf. all the people who e-mail Jimbo > asking him to make changes, or the people who volunteer for OTRS because > they want to fix errors on pages) It's difficult to correct these > assumptions, even after pointing out the big "edit" tab at the top of > nearly every page. > > And most people don't read instructions. And I suppose people who follow the "Contact Wikipedia" link take no notice of the content of the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contact_us which says these things. There is nothing on that page about VIP treatment, and I don't think there should be. If something gets into OTRS and is from a household name, it would be sensible to have it passed to someone with a lot of experience, but I don't know if that is part of the system. (I do find a certain irony that Fred started this thread, given his previous comments about monarchy. The whole "celebrities expect to be treated like royalty" thing strikes me as mainly a Hollywood invention. Actual royalty - bred to it - are the last to kick up a fuss in this fashion. So arriviste.) Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Charles Matthews < charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > If something gets into OTRS and is from > a household name, it would be sensible to have it passed to someone with a > lot of experience, but I don't know if that is part of the system. > Of course, we'd first have to establish that the message legitimately was from said household name, either directly or via an assistant or publicist. Even for legitimate VIPs, though, OTRS volunteers aren't going to change content without good reason (and "but it's my article" is not a good reason). -- Jim Redmond jredm...@gmail.com ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Charles Matthews < > charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > >> If something gets into OTRS and is from >> a household name, it would be sensible to have it passed to someone >> with a >> lot of experience, but I don't know if that is part of the system. >> > > Of course, we'd first have to establish that the message legitimately was > from said household name, either directly or via an assistant or > publicist. > Even for legitimate VIPs, though, OTRS volunteers aren't going to change > content without good reason (and "but it's my article" is not a good > reason). > > -- > Jim Redmond > jredm...@gmail.com We should assume it is from the person they claim to be. If it turns out they are not that problem can be addressed at that time. If they are the VIP they should get VIP treatment from the beginning. By which I mean courtesy and taking their complaint seriously, not doing every little thing they might want. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On 12 September 2012 18:32, Jim Redmond wrote: > For what it's worth, this is not just a VIP behavior. Most people assume > that Wikipedia has centralized control over content, and they want Someone > In Charge to fix things for them. (cf. all the people who e-mail Jimbo > asking him to make changes, or the people who volunteer for OTRS because > they want to fix errors on pages) It's difficult to correct these > assumptions, even after pointing out the big "edit" tab at the top of > nearly every page. And when they *do* see the edit tab, we get a Grant Shapps incident ... - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
> > > Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:07:03 -0600 (MDT) > From: "Fred Bauder" > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment > > > why should they > > bother > > politely pointing someone to OTRS, much less spend time and effort trying > > to be diplomatic themselves? > > > > Sxeptomaniac > > Because they are decent capable people, take pride in doing a good job, > and are concerned about the accuracy and reputation of Wikipedia. > > Fred > > Oh really? So why do we have to desysop admins? Were they "misusing their tools" in a "decent capable" way? Was it part of "doing a good job"? Were they desysopped for being "concerned about the accuracy and reputation of Wikipedia"? I can understand if you think I'm overstating the problem, but I find it ridiculous that you would deny the obvious: some people are drawn to adminship for the wrong reasons, and some maybe even for the right reasons, but choose to act on them in a short-sighted way. No RFA process, no matter how good, will ever be able to fully weed out people who really shouldn't be admins. The problem is, WP has no mechanism for dealing with those who turn out to not exemplify what an administrator should be, but stop short of actually breaking rules. Sxeptomaniac ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
Courtesy and taking complaints seriously (initially, at least) should be standard practice, not "VIP treatment". On Sep 12, 2012 7:17 PM, "Fred Bauder" wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Charles Matthews < > > charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > > > >> If something gets into OTRS and is from > >> a household name, it would be sensible to have it passed to someone > >> with a > >> lot of experience, but I don't know if that is part of the system. > >> > > > > Of course, we'd first have to establish that the message legitimately was > > from said household name, either directly or via an assistant or > > publicist. > > Even for legitimate VIPs, though, OTRS volunteers aren't going to change > > content without good reason (and "but it's my article" is not a good > > reason). > > > > -- > > Jim Redmond > > jredm...@gmail.com > > We should assume it is from the person they claim to be. If it turns out > they are not that problem can be addressed at that time. If they are the > VIP they should get VIP treatment from the beginning. By which I mean > courtesy and taking their complaint seriously, not doing every little > thing they might want. > > Fred > > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
>> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:07:03 -0600 (MDT) >> From: "Fred Bauder" >> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment >> >>> why should they >>> bother >>> politely pointing someone to OTRS, much less spend time and effort trying >>> to be diplomatic themselves? >>> >>> Sxeptomaniac >> >> Because they are decent capable people, take pride in doing a good job, >> and are concerned about the accuracy and reputation of Wikipedia. >> >> Fred >> on 9/12/12 2:58 PM, Matthew Jacobs at sxeptoman...@gmail.com wrote: >> > Oh really? So why do we have to desysop admins? Were they "misusing their > tools" in a "decent capable" way? Was it part of "doing a good job"? Were > they desysopped for being "concerned about the accuracy and reputation of > Wikipedia"? > > I can understand if you think I'm overstating the problem, but I find it > ridiculous that you would deny the obvious: some people are drawn to > adminship for the wrong reasons, and some maybe even for the right reasons, > but choose to act on them in a short-sighted way. No RFA process, no matter > how good, will ever be able to fully weed out people who really shouldn't > be admins. The problem is, WP has no mechanism for dealing with those who > turn out to not exemplify what an administrator should be, but stop short > of actually breaking rules. > > Sxeptomaniac Agreed. But how could such a mechanism be created given the existing structure of the Project? marc Riddell ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: >> How exactly? On OTRS we handle much more sensitive private info :-) >> >> Tom Morton > > Checkuser may be employed in either instance if there is a good reason, > such as an apparent sock puppet or abuse of multiple accounts. > > Fred Right. UTRS is what was formerly unblock-en-l (now automated / ticketed). I am no longer active there or OTRS, but was for some yeas on both. OTRS did not as a rule get IP address / personal identifying information about editors. The unblock-en-l folks did, routinely, get personal name / IP / email account troikas, which are within the community and in the privacy policy treated as especially sensitive. None of the non-legal stuff on OTRS seemed to be - within the community and internal privacy policy - that sensitive, though OTRS does see personal identifying info of those filing complaints or requests. As Fred points out, Checkuser checks were also routinely if rarely applied for questionable issues / incidents, though the non-CU approved unblock-en-l folks were only given the same public "results" info that gets posted on-wiki for sock checks. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] VIP Treatment
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Charles Matthews < >> charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: >> >>> If something gets into OTRS and is from >>> a household name, it would be sensible to have it passed to someone >>> with a >>> lot of experience, but I don't know if that is part of the system. >>> >> >> Of course, we'd first have to establish that the message legitimately was >> from said household name, either directly or via an assistant or >> publicist. >> Even for legitimate VIPs, though, OTRS volunteers aren't going to change >> content without good reason (and "but it's my article" is not a good >> reason). >> >> -- >> Jim Redmond >> jredm...@gmail.com > > We should assume it is from the person they claim to be. If it turns out > they are not that problem can be addressed at that time. If they are the > VIP they should get VIP treatment from the beginning. By which I mean > courtesy and taking their complaint seriously, not doing every little > thing they might want. > > Fred > > As opposed to regular OTRS tickets, which we should treat boorish, and dismiss their complaint out of hand? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
