How to quit Wikiaddiction?, advice sought Options

[wikademia.org]

go sell/give away your computer and discontinue internet access subscriptions.

[John Limey]

For me, Wikipedia addiction was always about the fun of looking up obscure facts (geeky I know), and then writing articles about things that really only interested me. I just like the intellectual exercise. I managed to more or less quit a while back, and I've channeled that energy into trying to write a book. It may never get published or read by anyone other than me, but it's the same intellectual exercise, it keeps me sharp, and if the book ever does get published it will really help me out career-wise (depending on what you do for a living your results may vary).

[everyking]

go sell/give away your computer and discontinue internet access subscriptions.

Since Scott is obviously a charitable soul, given his passionate BLP concerns, I was thinking he could devote himself to some kind of life of poverty and could go around washing the feet of celebrities or something.

[IShadowed]

Uh... there's no hope. Wikipedia is a wonderfully addictive black hole.

[Kelly Martin]

I do occasionally get the itch to edit something on Wikipedia. When this happens, I remind myself that it's a sucker's game and that anything you write will be quickly dissolved by Wikipedia's ever-increasing entropy field unless you spend massive amounts of time monitoring it for degradation. Better just to write it on your blog or your own wiki or whatever other outlet serves your needs.

Until you understand why you feel compelled to piddle with Wikipedia, you won't be able to quit.

[Cla68]

Before I was married, I was addicted to snowboarding. I spent a lot of money and time on it, including equipment and traveling to various ski resorts around North America and Japan. I spent most of my computer time in Internet forums talking about snowboarding. Once I was married and had my first child, I wasn't able to participate in it to any great extent any longer. I still carried the cravings, but they slowly faded away over time. What do I have to show for those five years or so of being subject to that addiction? Some great memories of beautiful mountain landscapes, fresh snowfall, time spent with friends who shared a similar interest, and a broken nose suffered when I was clotheslined by a tree branch.

Since I got married, I've been addicted to long distance running and martial arts. Again, I've spent a good amount of money and time on them. (My wife would probably not be very happy if she knew how much I've spent on some out-of-print Karate books). I've suffered some permanent injuries from both, and they have taken some time away from the family, but also have benefited in varying ways.

I guess not all addictions are necessarily harmful. There's probably a mix of good and bad effects that result from an addiction to a pasttime. Is the Wikipedia addiction harmful to you? Are your relationships or work suffering? Will your time spent with it provide you with any lasting and satisfying memories or other benefits?

This post has been edited by Cla68: Sun 27th December 2009, 11:41am

[JohnA]

Before I was married, I was addicted to snowboarding. I spent a lot of money and time on it, including equipment and traveling to various ski resorts around North America and Japan. I spent most of my computer time in Internet forums talking about snowboarding. Once I was married and had my first child, I wasn't able to participate in it to any great extent any longer. I still carried the cravings, but they slowly faded away over time. What do I have to show for those five years or so of being subject to that addiction? Some great memories of beautiful mountain landscapes, fresh snowfall, time spent with friends who shared a similar interest, and a broken nose suffered when I was clotheslined by a tree branch.

Since I got married, I've been addicted to long distance running and martial arts. Again, I've spent a good amount of money and time on them. (My wife would probably not be very happy if she knew how much I've spent on some out-of-print Karate books). I've suffered some permanent injuries from both, and they have taken some time away from the family, but also have benefited in varying ways.

I guess not all addictions are necessarily harmful. There's probably a mix of good and bad effects that result from an addiction to a pasttime. Is the Wikipedia addiction harmful to you? Are your relationships or work suffering? Will your time spent with it provide you with any lasting and satisfying memories or other benefits?

You forgot to add: I am Cla68 and I am a Wikiaddict.

[Cla68]

Before I was married, I was addicted to snowboarding. I spent a lot of money and time on it, including equipment and traveling to various ski resorts around North America and Japan. I spent most of my computer time in Internet forums talking about snowboarding. Once I was married and had my first child, I wasn't able to participate in it to any great extent any longer. I still carried the cravings, but they slowly faded away over time. What do I have to show for those five years or so of being subject to that addiction? Some great memories of beautiful mountain landscapes, fresh snowfall, time spent with friends who shared a similar interest, and a broken nose suffered when I was clotheslined by a tree branch.

Since I got married, I've been addicted to long distance running and martial arts. Again, I've spent a good amount of money and time on them. (My wife would probably not be very happy if she knew how much I've spent on some out-of-print Karate books). I've suffered some permanent injuries from both, and they have taken some time away from the family, but also have benefited in varying ways.

I guess not all addictions are necessarily harmful. There's probably a mix of good and bad effects that result from an addiction to a pasttime. Is the Wikipedia addiction harmful to you? Are your relationships or work suffering? Will your time spent with it provide you with any lasting and satisfying memories or other benefits?

You forgot to add: I am Cla68 and I am a Wikiaddict.

Yes I am. And, because I concentrate on articles, rather than administration, the benefits, at least so far, have outweighed the negatives. And yes, I have can back that up.

So, why not redirect this to Doc's original question? Doc, if you're addicted to Wikipedia and can't quit it, why not make it work for something good? Why don't you write a Featured Article on a subject that interests you, an article that will stand as the best article on the English Internet on that subject? If you do so, speaking from personal experience, it will be read, and it will be appreciated. (If you know who this is, you'll realize how high a compliment this is.)

This post has been edited by Cla68: Sun 27th December 2009, 2:41pm

[thekohser]

...because I concentrate on articles, rather than administration, the benefits, at least so far, have outweighed the negatives. And yes, I have can back that up.

And there's the con that Kelly and Jon have been advising us about.

[Cla68]

...because I concentrate on articles, rather than administration, the benefits, at least so far, have outweighed the negatives. And yes, I have can back that up.

And there's the con that Kelly and Jon have been advising us about.

I don't do it for Wikipedia. I do it for the subjects of the articles. Wikipedia doesn't deserve it, but the topics do. And yes, that means that Wikipedia Review is almost as viable a medium as Wikipedia, and perhaps will be more credible in the future if Wikipedia doesn't clean up its act.

This post has been edited by Cla68: Sun 27th December 2009, 2:34pm

[Casliber]

I guess the thing is Scott, you have to look at why you do the things you do. Text has some good ideas, and so does Cla68, in fact, I could have written something along the lines of Cla's but substituted birdwatching, bushwalking, some bonsai, RPGs, genealogy and travel to 60 countries, and other idle pastimes etc.

I get the impression there is a barrier to you doing what you want to do or enjoy doing, and the barrier lies within you. You don't sound like someone who enjoys themselves very much from the tone of the posts/exchanges you have on WP and WR, so if you can't just drop it and go enjoy stuff, maybe talking to someone IRL about it would be a good idea.

This post has been edited by Casliber: Sun 27th December 2009, 2:45pm

[FT2]

I do occasionally get the itch to edit something on Wikipedia. When this happens, I remind myself that it's a sucker's game and that anything you write will be quickly dissolved by Wikipedia's ever-increasing entropy field unless you spend massive amounts of time monitoring it for degradation. Better just to write it on your blog or your own wiki or whatever other outlet serves your needs. Until you understand why you feel compelled to piddle with Wikipedia, you won't be able to quit.

Yes.

Before I was married, I was addicted to snowboarding. I spent a lot of money and time on it, including equipment and traveling to various ski resorts around North America and Japan. I spent most of my computer time in Internet forums talking about snowboarding. Once I was married and had my first child, I wasn't able to participate in it to any great extent any longer. I still carried the cravings, but they slowly faded away over time. What do I have to show for those five years or so of being subject to that addiction? Some great memories of beautiful mountain landscapes, fresh snowfall, time spent with friends who shared a similar interest, and a broken nose suffered when I was clotheslined by a tree branch. [.....] I guess not all addictions are necessarily harmful. There's probably a mix of good and bad effects that result from an addiction to a pasttime. Is the Wikipedia addiction harmful to you? Are your relationships or work suffering? Will your time spent with it provide you with any lasting and satisfying memories or other benefits?

Yes again.


My own $0.02: know what you're doing and why you're doing it. Ideally do it because it pleases you to do so. If you don't really enjoy it but it will have some personal gratification later (working to support your family, study, fulfilling a responsibility you feel to the world, feels right ethically, helping others) then know that's why you're doing it and do it gladly so long as that reason carries enough weight. Then -- gracefully -- stop, without prejudice against resuming if you ever wish to.

Read about the "rescuer" role in the Karpman drama triangle. Recognize that you are not able to save everyone, and you have limits (of focus, time, stress, competing goals) too. You may have to say "I've done my part on BLPs, I need to drop it and leave it to others, much as I'd like to my life isn't about being a one man army against the tide and I've done more than my share already, I have other needs and priorities".

I find there's a definite point I begin to "switch off" to something - a line of work, a book, an online interest, or online itself. When I do, I let it happen. I trust that when that time comes in some area, whether work or social, I'll gently let go without looking back, stay in touch with those I have formed friendships with, and not attach. Wikipedia's lasted a long time; but I have no illusions. It's something I care about, I'm glad to help on, but I have my life and this isn't all of it. Feel that, try to gauge it honestly, then follow it.

Like walking away from a flame war the ability to say "I'm done, it's just feel its time to go" is the best guide. No need to look back. Similar to school, learning to walk, a holiday romance over and done... things have their season. Understanding when a part of life is truly over is the antithesis of addiction.

But above all, like others said above, knowing yourself is key.

This post has been edited by FT2: Sun 27th December 2009, 7:21pm

[RMHED]

OK, my early new year's resolution was to quit Wikipedia. Did so on Christmas Eve.

Now, before the cynics trout slap me, I know I've done this several times before. I've even been free of Wikipedia for months on end, but I've always ended up back on the crack.

In the past:
I've tried scrambling may passwords - that didn't work.
I've tried deleting stuff to piss people off and may returning more messy - that didn't work.

So, I see on this forum are some people who've tried and failed (Alison) and some people who actually succeeded (Kelly). Ignoring the involuntary banned users, any advice on the does and don't of kicking this unhealthy habit for good?

Should I avoid WR too?

Don't try and quit, just stop giving a damn. Use your admin account to shit stir, hours of entertainment at virtually no cost.

[The Joy]

OK, my early new year's resolution was to quit Wikipedia. Did so on Christmas Eve.

Now, before the cynics trout slap me, I know I've done this several times before. I've even been free of Wikipedia for months on end, but I've always ended up back on the crack.

In the past:
I've tried scrambling may passwords - that didn't work.
I've tried deleting stuff to piss people off and may returning more messy - that didn't work.

So, I see on this forum are some people who've tried and failed (Alison) and some people who actually succeeded (Kelly). Ignoring the involuntary banned users, any advice on the does and don't of kicking this unhealthy habit for good?

Should I avoid WR too?

Don't try and quit, just stop giving a damn. Use your admin account to shit stir, hours of entertainment at virtually no cost.

Or give your admin account away to a banned user or troublemaker?

[Cedric]

I have seen a lot of pertinent observations in this thread, but nothing that bears upon the reason I was able to break off so completely and instantly from Wikipedia-- anger. Not just any anger or perturbation, but the anger that comes from being well and truly betrayed. In my own experience, it serves equally well in the case of both individuals and institutions. Once you have been betrayed and you know it, it is far easier to cut ties absolutely. As long as the offender fails to acknowledge their offense and offers to make amends, you can hold them off at arm's length (which in the case of narcissistic assholes, essentially means forever).

I wasn't just angry at Jimbo and his Kabal Klown Kollege, who falsely represented Wikipedia to be an encyclopedia, but also at myself, who was so taken at the stated ideals of Wikipedia that I suspended my normal rule of "observe first, trust afterward". This does little if anything to lessen to culpability of Jimbo and the KKK, however.

If this seems too vague a reason to get really, really pissed off, then consider this: the WMF's own financial statements reveal a 3,061.61% increase in expenses in the four year period from June 30, 2005 to June 30, 2009! Now Jimbo insists that the WMF needs TEN MILLION DOLLARS to get through the next fiscal year, which means a 5,528.41% increase in expenses since 2005! Do you actually believe that reflects the reality?? Have the number of pages on WP actually increased 5,528.41% since 2005?? Does it seem even remotely plausible that server and administrative expenses have increased 5,528.41% since 2005??

I think it far, far more likely that Jimbo is laughing at you wiki-drudges as he snorts coke off of a Russian hooker's ass, generously subsidized by the WMF. If this is not enough to get you well and truly angry enough to cut ties, then you are just a no-hoper.

[Peter Damian]

Should I avoid WR too?

Yes. If you want to give up smoking, you need to give up drinking too. Or was it the other way round.

Oh yes and can I have your admin account pls. I will make really good use of it.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sun 27th December 2009, 11:25pm

[A Horse With No Name]

I would recommend joining the clergy, but that didn't work for me. Quite the opposite effect, actually.

[FT2]

If this seems too vague a reason to get really, really pissed off, then consider this: the WMF's own financial statements reveal a 3,061.61% increase in expenses in the four year period from June 30, 2005 to June 30, 2009! Now Jimbo insists that the WMF needs TEN MILLION DOLLARS to get through the next fiscal year, which means a 5,528.41% increase in expenses since 2005! Do you actually believe that reflects the reality?? Have the number of pages on WP actually increased 5,528.41% since 2005?? Does it seem even remotely plausible that server and administrative expenses have increased 5,528.41% since 2005??

Actually - yes. Very plausible indeed. Businesses in the $5 - 100m income bracket are my focus at work. An organization like WMF is a classic case. They became successful on the back of an ad-hoc team of pretty much "whoever helped out in the early days". Now they are bigger, more visible, and the focus changes a bit as the future plans gain depth.

Typical things that face such businesses: They need to fill out admin and peripheral roles (few early-stage businesses need an HR department). In WMF's case the servers used to go up and down like yoyos; they need to be reliable, more delivery, better backups, more developers. Its now rare they go down even though there's a lot more workload. They have expanded back-office functions - this year there's usability projects, donation and funding teams that didn't exist before. There's a sudden increase of organizational scope, instead of just one or two targets or areas with costs involves they're running multiple all in parallel and all growing, often also involving a wide geographic area. They need to build up a financial buffer, enough cash in the bank to see them safe if next year's bad or they have something unexpected happen; they may have formal paid advisors and professional analysts they didn't before, travel may go up as more outward-facing people attend more meetings, the newly employed professionals may need a market rate not a hobbyist rate for their paycheck, they may have to ditch or move people who were great for an early-day startup but who know they aren't skilled at the level now needed, recruitment itself isn't cheap, power costs or hosting methods (including duplicate hosting facilities) may change, number of page views (== data traffic) may radically increase, and so on.

I don't know the WMF back office any better than anyone else with access to the published data, so this isn't really a comment on WMF specifically. So I'm open to being told I'm wrong here. But these are typical and common things that many thriving businesses and non-profits in this situation and bracket undergo, and they can easily add millions to a budget. It's the difference between being a shoestring/garage structured organization, and an established organization with a proper fully operational back-office. Considering Wikimedia in 2005 and 2009/2010, very very plausible. More would not be untenable.

This post has been edited by FT2: Mon 28th December 2009, 12:42am

[anthony]

If this seems too vague a reason to get really, really pissed off, then consider this: the WMF's own financial statements reveal a 3,061.61% increase in expenses in the four year period from June 30, 2005 to June 30, 2009! Now Jimbo insists that the WMF needs TEN MILLION DOLLARS to get through the next fiscal year, which means a 5,528.41% increase in expenses since 2005! Do you actually believe that reflects the reality??

"One thing is, when you make a budget, you try and make it really conservative, by which I mean you posit that you're gonna need more than you think you actually will need. The reason you do that is because it's safer, right, then you have a pad in theory." - Sue Gardner, NotTheWikipediaWeekly Episode 3

It's not "lying". It's "positing that you need more than you think you actually will need".

This post has been edited by anthony: Mon 28th December 2009, 12:23am

[EricBarbour]

I think it far, far more likely that Jimbo is laughing at you wiki-drudges as he snorts coke off of a Russian hooker's ass, generously subsidized by the WMF. If this is not enough to get you well and truly angry enough to cut ties, then you are just a no-hoper.

Whatcha said.