Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Admin retirements _ Alison retired?
Posted by: Gold heart
Is it just the admim/checkuser/oversighter tools, or is it the whole affair with WP?
My analysis is that the project is going nowhere, just around in circles. With no goal in mind, how can Jimbo and the Foundation expect to keep the team together? Well you are in good company, many have been lost this last couple of years, the "saga" just goes on and on!
Checkuser must have been a pain in the butt, Jimbo should be made to do some of the dirty-work tool 
Posted by: SirFozzie
Can't say I saw this coming but we talked a while back and I should have. She was dealing with Wikipedia at its absolute cesspool worst, Oversight work is no fun and hard on the soul.
And there was really no making a clean break of it to her.. she did so much that if she hadn't made a full break, she would get trapped in a vicious cycle.
Remember that old line about "When you stare into the Abyss, the Abyss stares back at you?"
I think Allie was tired of the abyss's stare
Posted by: everyking
I thought she announced her retirement awhile ago, although she never fully went through with it. Well, I think it's probably for the best. I wish she would just give up (or ignore) adminship and become an ordinary editor, but I'm not sure she's capable of that.
Posted by: Alison
Is it just the admim/checkuser/oversighter tools, or is it the whole affair with WP?
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=23175&view=findpost&p=159831. And yeah, pretty-much the whole deal. If I edit again, it'll likely be with a different account. I'm done.
(My last edit was to create [[Ballymagash]] and link it to [[Hall's Pictorial Weekly]]. Not many people will get that, but you likely will
)I wish she would just give up (or ignore) adminship and become an ordinary editor, but I'm not sure she's capable of that.
Why? I was an 'ordinary editor' for ages before all that admin nonsense, and I spent my time editing Irish and medical articles. I'm still editing on other wikis without any problems, sysop bit or not.
Not sure what your point is here, EK??
Posted by: SirFozzie
EK are you aware that she did give up all her rights on en-WP? Checkuser, Oversight, Admin etcetera?
Posted by: Milton Roe
Is it just the admim/checkuser/oversighter tools, or is it the whole affair with WP?
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=23175&view=findpost&p=159831. And yeah, pretty-much the whole deal. If I edit again, it'll likely be with a different account. I'm done.
[...]
Why? I was an 'ordinary editor' for ages before all that admin nonsense, and I spent my time editing Irish and medical articles. I'm still editing on other wikis without any problems, sysop bit or not.
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
Now for more slouching. They surely deserve what they're headed for, and I for one am going to enjoy the many indignant shorebirds. It's already entertaining.
Posted by: gomi
Hoorah for Alison. As we always suspected, she is a reasonable person, and her reasonability and concern for others finally triumphed over the petty laurels of wiki-society. To the moderate but deluded Wikipidiot, it may appear that a powerful admin without an obvious axe to grind has left the project to more partisan and less ethical hands, but the truth is it was always thus dominated, and Alison could never sway it. Hoorah for Alison for departing a corrupt regime.
Posted by: everyking
Is it just the admim/checkuser/oversighter tools, or is it the whole affair with WP?
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=23175&view=findpost&p=159831. And yeah, pretty-much the whole deal. If I edit again, it'll likely be with a different account. I'm done.
(My last edit was to create [[Ballymagash]] and link it to [[Hall's Pictorial Weekly]]. Not many people will get that, but you likely will
)I wish she would just give up (or ignore) adminship and become an ordinary editor, but I'm not sure she's capable of that.
Why? I was an 'ordinary editor' for ages before all that admin nonsense, and I spent my time editing Irish and medical articles. I'm still editing on other wikis without any problems, sysop bit or not.
Not sure what your point is here, EK??
Because you've been saying this kind of thing for such a long time, yet I always see you on here talking about your administrative activities.
Posted by: Alison
Not sure what your point is here, EK??
Because you've been saying this kind of thing for such a long time, yet I always see you on here talking about your administrative activities.
Well now, how exactly am I going to do that http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steward_requests%2FPermissions&diff=1416413&oldid=1416275, hm?
I can hardly do "that kind of thing" without one, now can I?People have always advised that on retirement, I hang on to those all-important, fancy-schmancy 'bits'. In practice, that just doesn't work, as it's just another tie to keep you there.
Posted by: Gold heart
Is it just the admim/checkuser/oversighter tools, or is it the whole affair with WP?
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=23175&view=findpost&p=159831. And yeah, pretty-much the whole deal. If I edit again, it'll likely be with a different account. I'm done.
(My last edit was to create [[Ballymagash]] and link it to [[Hall's Pictorial Weekly]]. Not many people will get that, but you likely will
)Good old Frank and the lads down in legendary mythical [[Ballymagash]]
. I'm missing a lot of news lately, just 60 minutes a day computer work and eyesight in jeopardy of deterioration. There'll be a lota blind folk around WP, if that's not already the case! 
I think Allie was tired of the abyss's stare
Yeah, it's a pit without a bottom. The reason for that scenario is that there is no "end game". One important progressive step would be to implement verified accounts, and log in. Until then the circus will go on and on, a modern day version of the Flavian Amphitheatre.
Posted by: EricBarbour
. I'm missing a lot of news lately, just 60 minutes a day computer work and eyesight in jeopardy of deterioration. There'll be a lota blind folk around WP, if that's not already the case! Not only will they be blind, they'll be using WP tags in places where they don't work.......
Posted by: Emperor
Alison, you'll always be a sysop in my book.
Posted by: LaraLove
People have always advised that on retirement, I hang on to those all-important, fancy-schmancy 'bits'. In practice, that just doesn't work, as it's just another tie to keep you there.
Exactly. When I retired, so many people asked why I resigned the bit. Why not just keep it and not use it? But like you say, it is just another tie. And while it would be handy for the BLP work I continue to do periodically, it's best not to have the temptation to use it for other stuff, possibly finding myself sucked back in. Same thing with protecting my pages. Without my bit, I can't even post to my own talk page at this point, and it's kept anyone else from posting their pleas and kind messages. Not that I don't appreciate the thought, but I don't need anything to suck me back in.
If an admin is truly wanting to retire, the best two options are to go out like Dfrg.msc (T-C-L-K-R-D) and just slowly fade away without anyone really noticing and don't come back. Or go out by resigning your bit after fully protecting your pages, and disabling email. I chose that option. I have since re-enabled my email for BLP related reasons, though.
Anyway, point is, blocking one's self to prevent stupid actions or editing is sort of silly considering (unless I missed something) admins can still unblock themselves. Taking five seconds to unblock yourself, vs taking the time to find a 'crat to give you your bit back is completely different.
Posted by: LessHorrid vanU
People have always advised that on retirement, I hang on to those all-important, fancy-schmancy 'bits'. In practice, that just doesn't work, as it's just another tie to keep you there.
Exactly. When I retired, so many people asked why I resigned the bit. Why not just keep it and not use it? But like you say, it is just another tie. And while it would be handy for the BLP work I continue to do periodically, it's best not to have the temptation to use it for other stuff, possibly finding myself sucked back in. Same thing with protecting my pages. Without my bit, I can't even post to my own talk page at this point, and it's kept anyone else from posting their pleas and kind messages. Not that I don't appreciate the thought, but I don't need anything to suck me back in.
If an admin is truly wanting to retire, the best two options are to go out like Dfrg.msc (T-C-L-K-R-D) and just slowly fade away without anyone really noticing and don't come back. Or go out by resigning your bit after fully protecting your pages, and disabling email. I chose that option. I have since re-enabled my email for BLP related reasons, though.
Anyway, point is, blocking one's self to prevent stupid actions or editing is sort of silly considering (unless I missed something) admins can still unblock themselves. Taking five seconds to unblock yourself, vs taking the time to find a 'crat to give you your bit back is completely different.
(My underlining) Which, of course, is the last bit of umbilical cord that likely never quite severs - someone like Alison will always be able to get the bits back upon request, no matter what her current username, as long as she identifies herself to the satisfaction of the 'crat community/ArbCom/Jimbo. I don't think it derogatory to say that I think that Alison is fully aware of that potential, and it takes nothing away from the honourable withdrawal from sysop+ing that she has recently enacted. That door remains open, and possibly only removing yourself completely from the project(s) will cause that draught to cease.
Posted by: Cla68
Speaking just for myself, of course, Wikipedia is an addiction. I'm addicted to writing/editing articles about subjects that interest me. It's an addiction that does affect my personal life, because it takes time that I could be spending on other things. I assume that being heavily involved in Wikipedia's administration can also be addicting, which means that it may be hard for someone to walk away from it.
I've given up justifying my addiction based on the assumption that I'm helping create this truly wonderful encyclopedia for the world. As poorly managed as Wikipedia is, I don't see how that lofty goal could ever be reached without some drastic changes. I do feel, however, that the articles I put a lot of time into are of some value because people do read them, and I have them saved to my PC so that I can post them at Citizendium or Knol or some other place if Wikipedia ever goes kaput.
An honest admin like Alison does/did important work helping keep Wikipedia running. Nevertheless, I can see that it might be harder to justify to oneself further involvement when you don't see much progress being made as a result of your efforts.
Posted by: LamontStormstar
Why not sell the admin account for profit?
Posted by: Gold heart
Why not sell the admin account for profit?
Something really cool after playing
on the "WP field of battle"
Posted by: wikiwhistle
You could always give it to Dereks1x for the lulz.
Posted by: Alison
You could always give it to Dereks1x for the lulz.
lol - you guys!!
Posted by: emesee
freedom 
Posted by: Alison
freedom
Yayy!!! And y'know what - it feels good
The downside is that I get to read Kato's litany of BLP horrors but am able to do little or nothing about it anymore. But ... have to draw the line somewhere. It's not my responsibility and frankly, it's the system that's broken, not this BLP and that BLP. Patching over the cracks is just prolonging the inevitable and I've run out of fight anyway.
Posted by: Moulton
Systemic dysfunctionality cannot be corrected except by systemic reform.
As a number of retiring admins have noted, systemic reform is not in the cards as long as Jimbo is at the helm.
What's even more ominous is that the residual crew aboard Jimbo's doomed ship are self-selected to be similarly averse to systemic reform.
Slow-motion trainwrecks are becoming commonplace occurrences. Wikipedia is a subject of morbid fascination, because it's so easy to watch the trainwreck unfold, like a Greek or Shakespearean tragedy.
Posted by: Cedric
It's not my responsibility and frankly, it's the system that's broken, not this BLP and that BLP. Patching over the cracks is just prolonging the inevitable and I've run out of fight anyway.
As they say in "Joisey", "Ya can't polish a toid."
Posted by: Floydsvoid
Slow-motion trainwrecks are becoming commonplace occurrences. Wikipedia is a subject of morbid fascination, because it's so easy to watch the trainwreck unfold, like a Greek or Shakespearean tragedy.
I don't think this is exclusive to Wikipedia. This is epidemic. In the local newspaper today, what's left of it, was an article about people forgoing their Facebook obsession during Lent. Despite the mind-boggling computer power and storage space available today, it is all wasted on inane trivial human drama.
I'm somewhat surprised that Alison developed an addiction to this ... since I think she is old enough to have grown up without the computer teat and is an accomplished professional in the field to boot.
Posted by: Alison
I'm somewhat surprised that Alison developed an addiction to this ... since I think she is old enough to have grown up without the computer teat and is an accomplished professional in the field to boot.
Well, I've been on the intertubes for some 21 years now, and played with computers since the http://oldcomputers.net/pet4032.html first came out. I'm ancient
Re. Wikipedia, I wasn't addicted, per se, but I'd felt an obligation to fix up so much of the crap, and damage to others. Seriously, any so-called power and glory over there is just so much virtual dollars; it's worthless
Posted by: EricBarbour
And let's not forget the http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23210 currently surrounding the Obama article.
That Worldnetdaily article was posted by Drudge, was run by Fox News, is currently
going through the right-wing blog echo chamber, and has resulted in a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Barack_Obama
being conducted by Free Republic crazies.
That is very bad for Wikipedia. Freepers are batshit insane, and have plenty of time
and energy to harass WP admins.
You did the right thing, Alison. It's all going to hell.
Posted by: KimvdLinde
There are roughly two types of admin tasks for which you can use them, vandal-whacking, and content improvement. After I burned out because of SlimVirgin/JayJG/other pro-Israel editors, I only edit what I like, when I like, and use my admin bit in that context. If I see vandalism, I just leave it, and let other fix it. If each and everybody would have that mentality, it would force WP very quickly to change it ways. I am willing to do some form of flagged revisions stuff, but that is about it.
Posted by: Floydsvoid
Well, I've been on the intertubes for some 21 years now, and played with computers since the http://oldcomputers.net/pet4032.html first came out. I'm ancient
Re. Wikipedia, I wasn't addicted, per se, but I'd felt an obligation to fix up so much of the crap, and damage to others. Seriously, any so-called power and glory over there is just so much virtual dollars; it's worthless Gotcha, thought as much. I still think I have a few years on ya 'cause I thought the http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/129.html was the shit.
I've always been fascinated by the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics. It seems endemic in human behaviour to destruct when one can get away with it.
Posted by: Cla68
There are roughly two types of admin tasks for which you can use them, vandal-whacking, and content improvement. After I burned out because of SlimVirgin/JayJG/other pro-Israel editors, I only edit what I like, when I like, and use my admin bit in that context. If I see vandalism, I just leave it, and let other fix it. If each and everybody would have that mentality, it would force WP very quickly to change it ways. I am willing to do some form of flagged revisions stuff, but that is about it.
That's probably a good system for safeguarding against frustration and burn-out.
Posted by: Jaranda
If you ever want to comeback though (which we hope, as it's a major lost), try to get your tools back via IRC, not B-crat noticeboard, as of course you have some enemies around.
Posted by: Gold heart
There are roughly two types of admin tasks for which you can use them, vandal-whacking, and content improvement. After I burned out because of SlimVirgin/JayJG/other pro-Israel editors, I only edit what I like, when I like, and use my admin bit in that context. If I see vandalism, I just leave it, and let other fix it. If each and everybody would have that mentality, it would force WP very quickly to change it ways. I am willing to do some form of flagged revisions stuff, but that is about it.
There is a third type of admin. I see SirFozzie has finally seen the burning light of reality, and that WP is really is a 'drag'. Personally I never did see the benefits of Foz. He's the third type, the "Drama Queen". He revealed himself when he compromised and blocked some perfectly good editors, like Sarah777 and Domer48, in order to get some cheap publicity for his ArbCom election campaign, but that didn't work!