Jimbo's new website, Civilination.org promises new finger-waggling, scolding features Options

[thekohser]

CiviliNation is a Virginia non-profit organization in the process of obtaining federal 501©(3) status.

[Krimpet]

Jimbo and his beau (Jimbo & Jimbeau?) don't seem to realize that simply being "civil" means very little. You can maintain a cheery, polite façade in every word you write, carefully crafting your remarks to avoid insult or vitriol, while still being diabolical and manipulative. It's the attitude behind the words that actually counts. It takes all kinds, and I'd personally prefer dealing with a blunt and honest person to a civil yet slippery one.

[Kelly Martin]

Jimbo and his beau (Jimbo & Jimbeau?) don't seem to realize that simply being "civil" means very little. You can maintain a cheery, polite façade in every word you write, carefully crafting your remarks to avoid insult or vitriol, while still being diabolical and manipulative. It's the attitude behind the words that actually counts. It takes all kinds, and I'd personally prefer dealing with a blunt and honest person to a civil yet slippery one.

Jimmy's entire approach to life relies on manipulating people while maintaining a cheery, polite facade. Wikipedia, which is crafted in his image, does not tolerate blunt honesty any more than he does.

[anthony]

This whole thread reminded me to check up on one of Jimbo's other projects.

Just one? Don't forget about OpenServing.com and Search.Wikia.com!

I assume Jimbo was a little bit more into those (especially Search Wikia, as building a search engine is something he's been interested in for a quite a while now). This one, like the homeless project, seems to be just something he lent his name to and participates in half-heartedly.

[thekohser]

The CiviliNation wiki, hosted (with advertising that I doubt goes into the pending 501-c-3) on Wikia, Inc. servers, just got a little bit more accurate.

[Jon Awbrey]

Comment № 4 → (Your comment is awaiting moderation.)

Comment № 8 → (Your comment is awaiting moderation.)

Jon Not Getting Any Younger Here

[thekohser]

The CiviliNation wiki, hosted (with advertising that I doubt goes into the pending 501-c-3) on Wikia, Inc. servers, just got a little bit more accurate.

Hmm... that's odd...

Your user name or IP address has been blocked.

The block was made by Angela.

* Reason given: Kohs trolling
* Start of block: 23:08, December 31, 2009
* Expiry of block: infinity
* Intended blockee: Answer Ape
* Block ID: #4800
* Current IP address: 69.xxx.yyy.zz

Angela, you are a worthless coward. Happy new year to you and that weasel you work with at Wikia.


I would encourage anyone in the world to help keep the following content inserted in cybercivility.wikia.com:

In October 2006, Jimmy Wales publicly [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wikipedia Review&diff=prev&oldid=79585610 announced] that the Wikipedia Review approach to Wikipedia (an approach that Wales himself, six weeks earlier, had helped to shape) was “deeply unethical and inappropriate”, and he [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=&page=Arch+Coal&year=2006&month=10&tagfilter= deleted] the Wikipedia article about Arch Coal that Wikipedia Review had authored and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Editing_with_a_conflict_of_interest&diff=prev&oldid=79593222 mentioned] online. Even though it wasn’t written for payment, and the Arch Coal company wasn’t even aware of the article, Wales mistakenly assumed it was paid content and thusly labeled it “corporate spam”. Then he indefinitely [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AWikipedia Review&year=2006&month=10&tagfilter= blocked] the Wikipedia Review user account on Wikipedia, so that it could not edit any more. Some hours later, Wales returned to Wikipedia to further blast the article about Arch Coal, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_October_5&diff=prev&oldid=79737021 calling it] a “travesty of NPOV [neutral point of view]” and “corporate fluff”.  Wales also went to the blocked Wikipedia Review User page on Wikipedia and wrote a screed against the business there: "hiring Wikipedia Review... is counterproductive and unethical".  One of his [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Peter_M_Dodge/Outreach minions] then put the polemic in white lettering on a black background, just to make it stand out more.



It took Wales over two years to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AArch_Coal&diff=258731121&oldid=224255965 finally apologize] for how he acted and how poorly he handled the situation.  Now Wales is admonishing others, through CiviliNation, to be nice to others on the Internet.  Do as I say, not as I do, we suppose.

This post has been edited by thekohser: Fri 1st January 2010, 6:18am

[EricBarbour]

Angela, you are a worthless coward. Happy new year to you and that weasel you work with at Wikia.

And you're a brave one, you are, Gregg-O.

(Nope, sorry, I won't touch this. Just ignore the whole thing. I suspect that this wiki
will die out from lack of interest. The juice-drinkers don't want "civility", they want to
have power.....to abuse others with no consequences. This wiki would accomplish nothing
for them--it won't even give them that bizarre wiki editing high.)

The more of this shit I see, the more I think Jimbo's got some kid of evil brain power
that allows him to glamour people, and enslave them (or at least make them stalk him).

Like a vampire. Or better, like Rachel on Misfits.
Now, if only Jimbo would fall off a roof.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Fri 1st January 2010, 9:40am

[anthony]

The CiviliNation wiki, hosted (with advertising that I doubt goes into the pending 501-c-3) on Wikia, Inc. servers, just got a little bit more accurate.

Now now Greg, stop trolling. You know that Wikia and CiviliNation are completely separate.

[thekohser]

They're calling in reinforcements at Wikia's CiviliNation.

Looks like there were a lot of new accounts made today -- none of those I'll quote here were mine, by the way.

# 14:07, January 1, 2010 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Angela loves the taste of a good dick (Talk | contribs) New user account ‎
# 14:06, January 1, 2010 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! This user creation interface is crammed with squares and rectangles (Talk | contribs) New user account ‎
# 14:05, January 1, 2010 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Jimmy and his gold-plated washing machine (Talk | contribs) New user account ‎
# 14:03, January 1, 2010 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Angela likes big thangs in the mouth (Talk | contribs) New user account

What a shame, that a site intended to stamp out meanies on the Internet would attract so many meanies!

[wikademia.org]

Jimbo and his beau (Jimbo & Jimbeau?) don't seem to realize that simply being "civil" means very little. You can maintain a cheery, polite façade in every word you write, carefully crafting your remarks to avoid insult or vitriol, while still being diabolical and manipulative. It's the attitude behind the words that actually counts. It takes all kinds, and I'd personally prefer dealing with a blunt and honest person to a civil yet slippery one.

i would hope to deal with humans who are civil, polite, respectful, honest, and considerate... or at least try to do all those things...


rather than just one who mindlessly follows policies, avoids being "a d----", avoids legal threats, ignores all rules, and bla bla bla bla bla.


but the world ain't a perfect one, so oh well. <3

[Jon Awbrey]

Comment № 4 → (Your comment is awaiting moderation.)

Comment № 8 → (Your comment is awaiting moderation.)

Comment № 10 → (Your comment is awaiting moderation.)

I begin to get the feeling that Dubya, Dubya, and Company are not really serious about collecting Our Stories of Online Hostility

Say It Ain't So, Jimbo

Jon

[Somey]

Just ignore the whole thing. I suspect that this wiki will die out from lack of interest.

It already has. The recent "trolling" appears to be the most action it's seen since its inception.

Now, if only Jimbo would fall off a roof.

I doubt any self-respecting roof would let him get anywhere near it...!

[everyking]

Jimbo and his beau (Jimbo & Jimbeau?) don't seem to realize that simply being "civil" means very little. You can maintain a cheery, polite façade in every word you write, carefully crafting your remarks to avoid insult or vitriol, while still being diabolical and manipulative. It's the attitude behind the words that actually counts. It takes all kinds, and I'd personally prefer dealing with a blunt and honest person to a civil yet slippery one.

First of all, we can easily police name-calling and profanity--we really can't police slick manipulation. Secondly, even a slick manipulator contributes to a calm and peaceful atmosphere by refraining from angry outbursts when under stress. At the end of the day, you can maintain a community even when a lot of polite manipulation occurs, but you can't maintain a community when people are screaming at each other all the time. Real life is no different.

[Somey]

First of all, we can easily police name-calling and profanity--we really can't police slick manipulation. Secondly, even a slick manipulator contributes to a calm and peaceful atmosphere by refraining from angry outbursts when under stress. At the end of the day, you can maintain a community even when a lot of polite manipulation occurs, but you can't maintain a community when people are screaming at each other all the time. Real life is no different.

This is all wrong, EK.

First, we've all seen on Wikipedia, and with other dysfunctional communities (including families), that if you impose artificial civility requirements, people will simply redefine the terms involved - so that comments which would be seen as harmless by anyone else become "personal attacks" within the dysfunctional community.

Second, this is clearly "all or nothing" thinking. Adjusting the civility requirements to be more in line with real-world term definitions won't result in "people are screaming at each other all the time," it will result in people using easily-recognized conflict words some of the time, hopefully when the situation actually calls for it. What you have now is a situation where people who have been fully inculcated into the cult community have one standard, and people who haven't been inculcated have another, and the former group uses their higher standard as a cudgel against the latter group. This is how cults should work, and do work - but not encyclopedias.

Third, what does the phrase "maintain the community" really mean? Presumably it means the three basic tasks of keeping people around, bringing new people in, and getting rid of undesirables. Artificial civility rules don't do a very good job of any of those things - they represent short-term, limited thinking, the idea that if WP'ers are forced to be nice to people on the surface, they'll stick around long enough to allow themselves to be indoctrinated, and/or addicted. That isn't going to work forever, assuming it ever did. Besides, WP's focus has always been on bringing more people in, often at the expense of the other two things.

There's no fourth thing, but that's only because I have to go and do something non-internet-related now.

[Kelly Martin]

Artificial civility rules don't do a very good job of any of those things - they represent short-term, limited thinking, the idea that if WP'ers are forced to be nice to people on the surface, they'll stick around long enough to allow themselves to be indoctrinated, and/or addicted. That isn't going to work forever, assuming it ever did. Besides, WP's focus has always been on bringing more people in, often at the expense of the other two things.

And that's the real point of the civility rules: don't scare off the recruits until you've got them addicted. The problem that Wikipedia needs to get past, in this area at least, is that quantity is no substitute for quality. But Wikipedia's leadership is not interested in quality, and so nothing will be done.

[TungstenCarbide]

Angela, you are a worthless coward. Happy new year to you and that weasel you work with at Wikia.

Greg, this kind of comment is uncalled for. I think you should apologize to her. She's neither worthless or a coward.

This post has been edited by TungstenCarbide: Sun 3rd January 2010, 12:26am

[Emperor]

The more of this shit I see, the more I think Jimbo's got some kid of evil brain power
that allows him to glamour people, and enslave them (or at least make them stalk him).

Like a vampire. ...

Jimbo is a stud. I can only hope to become half the godking he is.

First, we've all seen on Wikipedia, and with other dysfunctional communities (including families), that if you impose artificial civility requirements, people will simply redefine the terms involved - so that comments which would be seen as harmless by anyone else become "personal attacks" within the dysfunctional community.

Nice observation.

[anthony]

Angela, you are a worthless coward. Happy new year to you and that weasel you work with at Wikia.

Greg, this kind of comment is uncalled for. I think you should apologize to her. She's neither worthless or a coward.

In all honesty I think any anger you have directed at Angela is probably misplaced.

[WordBomb]

http://civilination.org/news/about-2/board-of-directors/

Share your stories of online hostility on this website, and see if Jimbo is hostile toward your story.

While my story of incivility remains held for moderation, to his credit I did get email from Jimbo this morning asking me to forward him the email I referenced in my comment. I did so, and am hopeful of hearing back from him about it.

In the meantime, here's what I submitted:

It’s ironic that Jimbo Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia, would be on the board of this group, considering Wikipedia is one of the most hostile online environments I’ve encountered.

Here’s my story.

I discovered that a former journalist was violating multiple Wikipedia policies in the course of dramatically skewing articles relating to a specific form of stock market fraud. Basically, he was trying to cover the crime up. I blogged about what I had found, and one day, discovered a Wikipedia article about me had been created. It’s sources were comprised of nothing but this former journalist and his friends. The article was grossly slanted.

Recently, I’ve come to possess a series of private email exchanges in which this article is discussed. The person who created it admits that he did it to harm me. He was proud of that fact.

Jimbo Wales was on that email list, but did nothing.

Fortunately, the article was eventually removed, no thanks to Mr. Wales.

(Your comment is awaiting moderation.)

Because the content of those emails would be of interest to folks here, I've started a new thread about it. You can read it here.