Unable to deal with serious online conflict appears to involve the bulk of humanity and includes massive demographics we want, and need, to include.
Fred > Some _are_ better at it than others. Also some are better at editing then > dealing with other people, and some are just unable to deal with other > people in an environment where to a large extent, one is not held > accountable for one's actions. This is the downside of anonymity. en:WP > is > in general not a very friendly environment. I am not saying that the > majority of editors are unfriendly, but there is enough of an impact from > the antisocial side to make the average experience unclude some > significant > unpleasantness. Not everyone is prepared to tolerate that when doing > unpaid > work. When the unnecessary unpleasantness is dealt out by adminitrators, > people leave. When enough people leave, the progect stagnates and > eventually > collapses. Fortunately it is likely that the pieces will be picked up by > another project, so the work will not be lost. > Cheers, > Peter Southwood > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Josh Lim" <[email protected]> > To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 6:01 AM > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself > > >>I think what we need to consider here is where the loyalties of many of >>these so-called "problematic" editors reside, whether their dedication >> to >>maintaining the content where their expertise has been valuable has been >>harmful to the overall health of the community. While I think we are all >> on >>the side of Wikipedia here and we all have a genuine interest in >> improving >>the encyclopedia for everyone, we have gone to the point where we have >>started to perpetuate the idea that some are better at it than others, >>similar to that declaration in Animal Farmthat "all animals are equal, >> but >>some are more equal than others". >> >> There are many reasons as to why this is the case, but I guess we need >> to >> reiterate the need for us to break down barriers here, both between >> ourselves as editors (step away from compartmentalizing ourselves into >> spaces where everyone else will agree with us because we are familiar >> with >> them), and between ourselves as people. The latter, however, is very >> difficult to do, and it is one of the challenges that we have to face >> if >> we will want to assure Wikipedia's future success. >> >> Regards, >> >> Josh >> >> >> JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM >> Block I1, AB Political Science >> Major in Global Politics, Minor in Chinese Studies >> Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University >> Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines >> >> Trustee (2010-2013), Wikimedia Philippines >> Member, Ateneo Debate Society >> Member, The Assembly >> >> [email protected] | +63 (927) 531-8301 >> Friendster/Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor >> http://akira123323.livejournal.com >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Rui Correia <[email protected]> >> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2013 5:08 AM >> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself >> >> >> Greetings to All >> >> Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not >> compared >> to >> people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a long >> list >> of "to-do", but unfortunately time is not on my side. >> >> In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave the >> project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore having >> to >> fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics. >> >> In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis is >> fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher >> process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of >> people >> previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the >> resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the >> 'outsider' >> that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets 'good >> advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to >> temper >> his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is >> round >> at >> a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is making >> the >> WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal. >> >> And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email. >> >> I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one >> encounters when you include something negative about certain big >> corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and >> everbody >> else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of "yes, we >> know >> there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear >> you!". >> >> Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly - >> was >> anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are >> legions >> out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know >> that >> they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here, >> http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles >> >> I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word >> "downgrade" to refer to people using Windows 8 who wanted to go back to >> XP. >> For a failed product, by Microsoft's own admission, going back to XP is >> an >> upgrade, going back to sanity, not a downgrade. >> >> I was first accused of trolling, then something else, then of offending >> the >> entire community of users of Windows 8. The editor who is adamant - not >> the >> first time - to purge ant-MS from the talkpage violated the 3RR, but >> nothing gets done about it. I reported the 3RR, and it was immediately >> closed, labelled as being relatiatory. There is a backlog of issues on >> that >> page, but my entry was closed within minutes. >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Codename_Lisa_reported_by_User:Rui_Gabriel_Correia_.28Result:_Closed.29 >> >> It was closed, claiming that it was already being addressed elsewhere. >> >> So, I too will consider my stay here. Like I said right at the top, I >> don't >> do much here, so I am certain I will not even be missed. I edit in >> eight >> languages, small little bits here and there. I participated in a number >> of >> initiaves on the development of Chapters in Africa and am happy to see >> that >> things are moving. I had the honour and privilege to meet Jimmy Wales >> in >> South Africa and to discuss a few things relating to WP in Africa. >> >> So, it is time to wind down anr retire into a corner. I am busy with a >> novel, I am sure that is where I should invest my time and energy. >> >> Sincere regards to all, happy editing >> >> Rui Correia >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> _________________________ >> Rui Correia >> Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Work Consultant >> Bridge to Angola - Angola Liaison Consultant >> >> Mobile Number in South Africa +27 74 425 4186 >> Número de Telemóvel na Ãfrica do Sul +27 74 425 4186 >> _______________ >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
