SirFozzie: Teetering on the edge... Options

[SirFozzie]

The more I think about things on Wikipedia, the more I'm inclined to use the old Branch Rickey line when after a poor year for his team, one of his top players demanded a raise....

"We finished last with you.. we can finish last without you just as well".

Why?

Because quite frankly, I'm tired of pushing against the status quo in so many things.

Ireland related editwars? Yeah. THAT'S gonna go away real soon.

"Fringe Science"? Dear god, I hope people won't be surprised that my first, second, and third thoughts when reading all the AE/AN/ANI reports since the ArbCom case closed ten days ago was "God, I wish I could ban them all". Not Argumentum Ad Nauseum, more like Argumentum Ad Insanium. (I know, bad Latin, I don't care)

Flagged Revisions? Again, the status quo will never change. there's too much inertia to ever get it into motion without something extra-ordinary (IE, Jimbo decides to take the PR hit and God-Kings something through)

Followers of (insert political party here) thinks Wikipedia is far too biased in favor of (insert political party here). (and usually, the people on that side think it's just as biased the other way).

Even when ArbCom does things right, they screw things up. ScienceApologist's topic ban is being flouted blatantly, and instead of letting a clear boundary be set, they demand it be done as an "ArbCom clarification", which means at least some folks on ArbCom sit and discuss things endlessly..) This thing closed ten days ago. A "clarification" on the wording shouldn't take another 4+ days.. they have everything at hand! But instead, the fire rages out of control. Same as it ever was.

I was talking with a person recently whose name gets bandied around here quite frequently (although not as frequently as it used to). We got to talking about ArbCom Enforcement and the situation on Wikipedia. And they said as a conservative estimate, there would need to be at least THREE times as many administrators to keep things under control. Not three times as many admins at AE (although that would help), three times as many administrators, period! Not to mention 80% of the admin class aren't doing much of anything to manage conflicts on Wikipedia

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's time to let someone else have fun with the mop, and drift away. Let all the articles on my watchlist go, and let the vandals at em.

[tarantino]

The more I think about things on Wikipedia, the more I'm inclined to use the old Branch Rickey line when after a poor year for his team, one of his top players demanded a raise....

"We finished last with you.. we can finish last without you just as well".

Why?

Because quite frankly, I'm tired of pushing against the status quo in so many things.

Ireland related editwars? Yeah. THAT'S gonna go away real soon.

"Fringe Science"? Dear god, I hope people won't be surprised that my first, second, and third thoughts when reading all the AE/AN/ANI reports since the ArbCom case closed ten days ago was "God, I wish I could ban them all". Not Argumentum Ad Nauseum, more like Argumentum Ad Insanium. (I know, bad Latin, I don't care)

Flagged Revisions? Again, the status quo will never change. there's too much inertia to ever get it into motion without something extra-ordinary (IE, Jimbo decides to take the PR hit and God-Kings something through)

Followers of (insert political party here) thinks Wikipedia is far too biased in favor of (insert political party here). (and usually, the people on that side think it's just as biased the other way).

Even when ArbCom does things right, they screw things up. ScienceApologist's topic ban is being flouted blatantly, and instead of letting a clear boundary be set, they demand it be done as an "ArbCom clarification", which means at least some folks on ArbCom sit and discuss things endlessly..) This thing closed ten days ago. A "clarification" on the wording shouldn't take another 4+ days.. they have everything at hand! But instead, the fire rages out of control. Same as it ever was.

I was talking with a person recently whose name gets bandied around here quite frequently (although not as frequently as it used to). We got to talking about ArbCom Enforcement and the situation on Wikipedia. And they said as a conservative estimate, there would need to be at least THREE times as many administrators to keep things under control. Not three times as many admins at AE (although that would help), three times as many administrators, period! Not to mention 80% of the admin class aren't doing much of anything to manage conflicts on Wikipedia

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's time to let someone else have fun with the mop, and drift away. Let all the articles on my watchlist go, and let the vandals at em.

I recommend you go out in a blaze of glory. ;)

[Kato]

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's time to let someone else have fun with the mop, and drift away. Let all the articles on my watchlist go, and let the vandals at em.

That will happen eventually anyway.

Why not make the break now?

See John A:

You are being exploited to provide free labor in return for supporting an enormous enterprise because having sacrificed so much, it's difficult to walk away from.

Once you realise that you want a life where someone isn't turning your house and garden over even five seconds 24 hours a day 365 days a year, then you'll start to dislike WP. Then you'll feel like quitting. Then you'll pick one final fight. Then you'll sit in a darkened room and decide whether to go for "blaze of glory" or just walk away into the night.

It's a labor of love, right until the moment you realise that the project and most everyone else, could not give a shit about you and what you've sacrificed for it. You've sacrificed so much but the returns will diminish and the "sysop" bit will mean less and less emotionally and intellectually.

Oh and Jimbo Wales is making money hand over fist because of WP while you get nothing.

One day, you'll wake up and realise that what seems like cynicism or vindictiveness on my part today, is nothing more that the unvarnished truth, the red pill that most of us here took some time ago.

[SirFozzie]

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's time to let someone else have fun with the mop, and drift away. Let all the articles on my watchlist go, and let the vandals at em.

That will happen eventually anyway.

Why not make the break now?

See John A:

You are being exploited to provide free labor in return for supporting an enormous enterprise because having sacrificed so much, it's difficult to walk away from.

Once you realise that you want a life where someone isn't turning your house and garden over even five seconds 24 hours a day 365 days a year, then you'll start to dislike WP. Then you'll feel like quitting. Then you'll pick one final fight. Then you'll sit in a darkened room and decide whether to go for "blaze of glory" or just walk away into the night.

It's a labor of love, right until the moment you realise that the project and most everyone else, could not give a shit about you and what you've sacrificed for it. You've sacrificed so much but the returns will diminish and the "sysop" bit will mean less and less emotionally and intellectually.

Oh and Jimbo Wales is making money hand over fist because of WP while you get nothing.

One day, you'll wake up and realise that what seems like cynicism or vindictiveness on my part today, is nothing more that the unvarnished truth, the red pill that most of us here took some time ago.

Why not? Because there has been times where I've been able to help WP out, and I agree with WP's aims.. IN PRINCIPLE. The problem is that it's become so big and unwieldy, it's the theoretical 900 lb gorilla in the room. You can't move it, you can't ignore it, and you can't get rid of it.

[Kato]

Why not? Because there has been times where I've been able to help WP out, and I agree with WP's aims.. IN PRINCIPLE. The problem is that it's become so big and unwieldy, it's the theoretical 900 lb gorilla in the room. You can't move it, you can't ignore it, and you can't get rid of it.

900 lbs? That Gorilla has put on 100 lbs in the last year or so:

Phil Sandifer. October 2007.

"We also have to watch out, though - for fuckheads like ED and even Bagley we're, honestly, well-equipped to handle them as-is because they're so self-obviously stupid. But we have to remember, we are the 800 lb gorilla in most conflicts with people.

We are huge. We are a huge fucking website staffed by people who do not know how to run the ninth biggest website on Teh Intarwebs.

We are bigger than Blogger, bigger than eBay, and bigger than Amazon. We have no clue how to deal with that. And I count myself in that we.

I have no fucking clue why I am a powerful and trusted administrator on the ninth biggest website in the world."

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/kong.jpg)

[LaraLove]

<snip>

I'm wondering if it's time to let someone else have fun with the mop, and drift away. Let all the articles on my watchlist go, and let the vandals at em.

Stop thinking about it, dude. Just do it. I thought about it for months. Being out of the drama and the repetitiveness and endless discussion leading to no consensus. The time wasted, the frustration and anger. It's gone, Foz. Peace out of that place and be happy.

[Milton Roe]

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's time to let someone else have fun with the mop, and drift away. Let all the articles on my watchlist go, and let the vandals at em.

I have already largely done that, but because I like to write, I still end up with articles on my watchlist, and still have to watch them IP-vandalized. And while this goes on I have to watch as random admins indef sprotect stuff they are interested in but tired of watching, while they might deign to grant me a 24 hour sprotection for my articles of interest, on grounds that it's a pillar that ANYBODY CAN EDIT. Which they apparently take to mean that "anybody can edit as an IP-user with no person-traceable email address."

I've been wondering if there's anything I can do about this. Complaint does no good, because I only run into the "anyone can edit" robots, who are pretty much the same kind of people as the "RS, V, and NOTABILITY fix all BLP problems" people. They do not respond to evidence and logic. And alas, sarcasm and namecalling are forbidden on WP (unless you're JzG).

So what to do? Well, there exists a Twilight Zone between the bright land of SunshineUpTheAss and the darker land of General Strike. It's called "Work Slowdown." It's what you can do to show your importance in the work-place, without getting yourself specifically fired.

So here's my idea for IP vandalism: We spread the meme that it should not be reverted by any human on Wednesdays. I was going to suggest weekends, but too much of this occurs doing schoolhours, so Weekends would not be as good. Wednesdays it is. And whereever you are in the world, it's midnight to midnight on your particular Wednesday. That spreads it out a bit, but who cares? Keep It Simple.

On Wednesays, we turn all IP-vandal-edits over to Twinkle-users trying to lick their way up the great brown snowcone, True-Wiki-believers, and ClueBot. And good riddance! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif) They'll enjoy it, and they deserve it. I'm gunna watch and *I'll* certainly enjoy it. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Now, what happens if I'm about to fix a spelling error in my favorite article and find that somebody has just added the helpful fact that COACH J. WESLEY SMITH IS A FLAMING FAGGOT? Answer: I ignore this, add my correction, and save. Somebody else may have to remove the offending bit manually, if they notice it. It keeps editors off the streets and out of the pool halls, and they feel useful. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

So spread the word. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) Wednesday is the official day when WP editors don't fix any problem that would long ago have been fixed if the community didn't have so much free slave labor as to not worry their heads about labor-saving fixes to policy. Let's let the people who still believe in the policy, do the work themselves on that day-of-rest. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif)

We can later apply this to BLP and a lot of other ordinary fixes that ordinary editors now perform, but shouldn't have to on a rational website. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

Milton

[SirFozzie]

And... it's done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sir...ministrator_bit.

[Kevin]

And... it's done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sir...ministrator_bit.

As is mine

I was just going to write how much I agreed with what SirFozzie said.

Kevin

[Kato]

Change of plan, guys!

Rather than quit, make a statement....

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/revert.jpg)

[LaraLove]

And... it's done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sir...ministrator_bit.

As is mine

I was just going to write how much I agreed with what SirFozzie said.

Kevin

Congratulations to you both.

[Kevin]

Change of plan, guys!

Rather than quit, make a statement....

I think any statement an individual could make is destined to be lost in the noise. Even a spectacular burnout is soon forgotten.

Kevin

[LaraLove]

I think any statement an individual could make is destined to be lost in the noise.

I think a good statement to serve as a record as to why you resigned and/or retired is a positive. The more admins that drop for the same reasons, the more likely some change will eventually be pushed through. Sending a message is important, in my opinion.

[Jon Awbrey]

Here's a suggestion for folks who are beginning to outgrow their Wiki-Pampers™.

If you have articles you care about, just GFDL them over to the main space at Wikipedia Review.

If you have articles you created and wrote all the significant parts of, up to some version, say, then put your own work in the directory space at Wikipedia Review, and develop the article further as you see fit.

If you know folks you can collaborate with, then you can work out collaborative versions in the main space by pooling your efforts, all the while keeping your own perspectives in directory space.

It doesn't really take all that long to get decent rankings on most search engines, even on Google, despite all its warping.

You'd be surprised how productive you can be in an environment with adult management.

Jon Awbrey

[Kevin]

I think any statement an individual could make is destined to be lost in the noise.

I think a good statement to serve as a record as to why you resigned and/or retired is a positive. The more admins that drop for the same reasons, the more likely some change will eventually be pushed through. Sending a message is important, in my opinion.

I have made a statement of sorts, so that others will know my reasons. I can't see it having any impact whatsoever though, unless the resignations ramp up significantly.

Kevin

[everyking]

Well, I haven't been editing much myself, partly due to my ArbCom difficulties, but mainly due to real life things. I haven't decided whether I'll eventually return to writing piles of new content everyday, or whether I'll end up as only an occasional editor, making updates here and there when necessary. Admittedly, I'm in kind of an unusual situation where the management has said they'd rather that I not come to work, and while they aren't going to actually fire me, they are prepared to make my life difficult if I do show up. Probably I wouldn't be sitting on the fence about it if not for that absurdity.

[Alison]

And... it's done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sir...ministrator_bit.

Congratulations, David (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) I'm happy for you. You've had a hellish week in RL (but let's not talk about that here), and you really don't need the work, the heartache and the frustration that goes with all this.

Celebrate time! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/letsgetdrunk.gif)

As is mine

I was just going to write how much I agreed with what SirFozzie said.

Kevin

Well done to you too, Kevin! At least take a break from the mayhem ....

[Milton Roe]

Well, I haven't been editing much myself, partly due to my ArbCom difficulties, but mainly due to real life things. I haven't decided whether I'll eventually return to writing piles of new content everyday, or whether I'll end up as only an occasional editor, making updates here and there when necessary. Admittedly, I'm in kind of an unusual situation where the management has said they'd rather that I not come to work, and while they aren't going to actually fire me, they are prepared to make my life difficult if I do show up. Probably I wouldn't be sitting on the fence about it if not for that absurdity.

Isaac Asimov put up with that for a couple of decades. Boston U Med School wanted to fire him because he hated doing research and didn't bring in grant money. It didn't matter that he was their best lecturer. But they couldn't fire him because he had tenure. So they just quit paying him and said he didn't have to teach or come in to work at all. So he didn't-- but he kept the title of associate prof, and his mailbox.

Twenty years later his writing had made his so famous and well-known that B.U. was scrambling all over themselves to associate with him and claim him, and they promoted him to full professor (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) . None of it would have been possible if they hadn't semi-fired him, giving him time to write full-time.

Just follow your bliss. It usually works out. And even if when it doesn't, you generally are happier.

[everyking]

Well, I haven't been editing much myself, partly due to my ArbCom difficulties, but mainly due to real life things. I haven't decided whether I'll eventually return to writing piles of new content everyday, or whether I'll end up as only an occasional editor, making updates here and there when necessary. Admittedly, I'm in kind of an unusual situation where the management has said they'd rather that I not come to work, and while they aren't going to actually fire me, they are prepared to make my life difficult if I do show up. Probably I wouldn't be sitting on the fence about it if not for that absurdity.

Isaac Asimov put up with that for a couple of decades. Boston U Med School wanted to fire him because he hated doing research and didn't bring in grant money. It didn't matter that he was their best lecturer. But they couldn't fire him because he had tenure. So they just quit paying him and said he didn't have to teach or come in to work at all. So he didn't-- but he kept the title of associate prof, and his mailbox.

Twenty years later his writing had made his so famous and well-known that B.U. was scrambling all over themselves to associate with him and claim him, and they promoted him to full professor (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) . None of it would have been possible if they hadn't semi-fired him, giving him time to write full-time.

Just follow your bliss. It usually works out. And even if when it doesn't, you generally are happier.

The analogy is made funnier when one considers that I don't get paid. It's like having to pick the lock to the building every day so I can get in and do volunteer work.

[Cla68]

I was talking with a person recently whose name gets bandied around here quite frequently (although not as frequently as it used to). We got to talking about ArbCom Enforcement and the situation on Wikipedia. And they said as a conservative estimate, there would need to be at least THREE times as many administrators to keep things under control. Not three times as many admins at AE (although that would help), three times as many administrators, period! Not to mention 80% of the admin class aren't doing much of anything to manage conflicts on Wikipedia

I notice you used "they" instead of "he" or "she" to refer that person. I think "they" are right that Wikipedia needs three times more admins to stay on top of project maintenance. Of course, though, the admins also need a more structured organization to help support their decision making and institutionalize standard responses to similar events. Hopefully, the person you were conversing with has never helped torpedo anyone's RfA for political reasons, because that would have removed some admins that might have helped shoulder the load for the rest of you all.

Anyway, simply asking for a suspension of the privileges is a graceful way to go, as opposed to blocking all of the problem editors from the Troubles and Fringe Science, then deleting their userpages and salting them with profane edit summaries, or redirecting all their userpages and the articles in question to Jimbo's userpage and then fully protecting them, or something like that.

By the way, your efforts with the Mantanmoreland fiasco did produce some results. Your status as an admin probably gave you some authority to push that through that you might otherwise not have had.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[emesee]

they don't deserve for you to share your thoughts with them via edits. not until the wikipedia disease can be cured. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif)

but on the other hand...

[Caknuck]

So, in the matter of three days, Barneca, Alison, SirFozzie and Kevin all retired. I feel like the cool kids just left the food court and I still have a two-thirds full Orange Julius and a snot-nosed kid brother to watch over.

[EricBarbour]

So, in the matter of three days, Barneca, Alison, SirFozzie and Kevin all retired. I feel like the cool kids just left the food court and I still have a two-thirds full Orange Julius and a snot-nosed kid brother to watch over.

Well.....either you're a masochist with a taste for kid-brother mucus (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif) ,
or you think the project can be "saved".

Seriously, it's so big and screwed up, the only way to "save" it is to let it collapse,
and pick up the pieces later. (Hopefully, after Jimbo, Gerard and their little
buddies are out of the picture.)

[gadfly]

Interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dds...s_administrator

[Peter Damian]

Interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dds...s_administrator

Fourth, although the notion of wikipedia still seems good, its actual state now seems to me to be almost fatally flawed because of its large, unwieldy structure that makes real effective change impossible. This is largely because there appears to be no one at a high enough level who is willing to make the tough decisions necessary to improve it, perhaps because of a too-sentimental clinging on to principles that are now counter-productive. So, we have the curse of nationalism that causes endless disputes that should simply be stamped on (see the whole swathe of problems brought by problems to do with Ireland-related issues as one example), small highly vocal pressure groups that cause disruption (like the ongoing Arbcom case to do with Ayn Rand), and a failure to take a principled stand in matters of Fringe Science and other areas when advocates of fringe views use arguments that one might call "argumentuum ad attrition" (to mangle poor Latin) to wear the opposition down.

Quite. The Ayn Rand was what did for me also (I have given up for Lent but perhaps we can make it permanent).

[privatemusings]

I'm not going to miss this one... it took me 4 years to grow a mullet, and by that time the cool kids had shaved heads. I too have resigned my admin bit - uniquely without actually acquiring it in the first place - that's how much I don't want it any more ;-)

I'm kinda surprised at all this though, to be honest - haven't the fundamental criticisms been present for ages now? Is this a cost / benefit type decision for some, a la John A - and if so, what was the catalyst for the realisation ('cos it doesn't seem much changed?)

Is this an 'insiders only' crisis, of the existential angst variety, (prolly, I reckon) or does this represent an actual shift in some dynamic or other....? interesting stuff......

[Jon Awbrey]

I'm not going to miss this one … it took me 4 years to grow a mullet, and by that time the cool kids had shaved heads. I too have resigned my admin bit — uniquely without actually acquiring it in the first place — that's how much I don't want it any more ;-)

I'm kinda surprised at all this though, to be honest — haven't the fundamental criticisms been present for ages now? Is this a cost / benefit type decision for some, a la John A — and if so, what was the catalyst for the realisation ('cos it doesn't seem much changed?)

Is this an 'insiders only' crisis, of the existential angst variety, (prolly, I reckon) or does this represent an actual shift in some dynamic or other…? interesting stuff……

The Customary Nine Days Have Expired …

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[A Horse With No Name]

So, in the matter of three days, Barneca, Alison, SirFozzie and Kevin all retired. I feel like the cool kids just left the food court and I still have a two-thirds full Orange Julius and a snot-nosed kid brother to watch over.

Plus Ddstretch's sign-off -- I assume he was watching "Pride of the Yankees" before writing that sign-off.

Alison's departure is a major shame, because she brought class and dignity to the proceedings. But as for the departure of those other admins -- big f**king deal. I think their increasingly ridiculous farewells to adminship cruelly displays how they have completely lost track of reality in regard to where a volunteer hobby site like Wikipedia should fit into their lives. My message to SirFozzie, Barneca, Kevin and Ddstretch: come on, you slobs, grow up and get a life.

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name:

[LaraLove]

Shut the fuck up, Horse. For those of us spending time here because we want to see change come to Wikipedia... some responsible improvement, this is great. Admins dropping out for reasons like DDstretch pointed out in his fourth paragraph is exactly what is needed to eventually bring a wake-up call to the deaf and dumb masses of Wikipedia.

I have made a statement of sorts, so that others will know my reasons. I can't see it having any impact whatsoever though, unless the resignations ramp up significantly.

It's already begun.

[A Horse With No Name]

Shut the fuck up, Horse. For those of us spending time here because we want to see change come to Wikipedia... some responsible improvement, this is great. Admins dropping out for reasons like DDstretch pointed out in his fourth paragraph is exactly what is needed to eventually bring a wake-up call to the deaf and dumb masses of Wikipedia.

Of course it is great -- insecure and (let's not kid ourselves) incompetent admins do Wikipedia no great service, and the bye-bye texts that are piling up show these people (1) are not qualified to hold a position of responsibility, (2) have no clue how to deal with a variety of personalities in benign circumstances, and (3) are a bunch of drama queens. Each one of these ridiculous farewells statements is funnier than the next -- and I think Ddstretch deserves a barnstar for crafting one of the very worst resignations letter in the history of English-language correspondence.

These slobs have completely forgotten that adminship is No Big Deal. And their departure, quite frankly, is no big deal -- their storming off won't disrupt operations, nor will it speed change. Wikipedia, not unlike any bloated bureaucracy, will wobble along as if nothing happened. Remember what Charles DeGaulle said: the graveyards of the world are filled with indispensable men.

[Jon Awbrey]

Remember what Charles DeGaulle said : the graveyards of the world are filled with indispensable men.

But that's just men …

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[LaraLove]

[ (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) ]

The more admins that drop, the more shit that will pile up. The more admins that put messages stating these same reasons for their departure, the greater the chance that it can be used as an example of why change needs to come. The more admins that drop for the same reasons, the more likely the press will pick it up.

And the "adminship is no big deal" is a crock of shit, and anyone who believes it is a moron. For what Wikipedia is and how it operates, adminship is a damn big deal. It's an umbrella on a perpetually rainy day; and if you try to take that umbrella away, they just beat you with it.

It may be no big deal when considering it's a volunteer job on a website, but as far as the website is concerned, it needs those volunteers. As the numbers continue to dwindle, with the more veteran admins dropping out, it's putting more pressure on the already spread thin core of admins, more and more of whom are children. People are dropping out now in disgust and frustration. Some of them after feeling overwhelmed. It doesn't get better from there without change. It only gets worse. With fewer principled people fighting the good fight, the dipshits win. The frustration grows, and with more shit to deal with, it's more overwhelming.

This is all completely obvious.

[Milton Roe]

And the "adminship is no big deal" is a crock of shit, and anyone who believes it is a moron. For what Wikipedia is and how it operates, adminship is a damn big deal. It's an umbrella on a perpetually rainy day; and if you try to take that umbrella away, they just beat you with it.

Ironically, given the drama of an RfA, it's somewhat easier to become an admin these days if you've kept strictly out of politics and have no new and subversive ideas for making the site better. Thus, more and more it selects for robots. This is not necessarily good.

It may be no big deal when considering it's a volunteer job on a website, but as far as the website is concerned, it needs those volunteers. As the numbers continue to dwindle, with the more veteran admins dropping out, it's putting more pressure on the already spread thin core of admins, more and more of whom are children.

That is the way of the world. As the officers are killed off, eventually you get to the point that the only people clueless enough to go into the meatgrinder, are teenagers. The origin of the word "infantry" is exactly what you might think from first looking at it: it doesn't mean children in diapers as in English, but it does refer to children with weapons.

[Bottled_Spider]

-- and I think Ddstretch deserves a barnstar for crafting one of the very worst resignations letter in the history of English-language correspondence.

You actually managed to read it all without going into a coma? Respect!

[A Horse With No Name]

[ (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) ]

The more admins that drop, the more shit that will pile up. The more admins that put messages stating these same reasons for their departure, the greater the chance that it can be used as an example of why change needs to come. The more admins that drop for the same reasons, the more likely the press will pick it up.

And the "adminship is no big deal" is a crock of shit, and anyone who believes it is a moron. For what Wikipedia is and how it operates, adminship is a damn big deal. It's an umbrella on a perpetually rainy day; and if you try to take that umbrella away, they just beat you with it.

It may be no big deal when considering it's a volunteer job on a website, but as far as the website is concerned, it needs those volunteers. As the numbers continue to dwindle, with the more veteran admins dropping out, it's putting more pressure on the already spread thin core of admins, more and more of whom are children. People are dropping out now in disgust and frustration. Some of them after feeling overwhelmed. It doesn't get better from there without change. It only gets worse. With fewer principled people fighting the good fight, the dipshits win. The frustration grows, and with more shit to deal with, it's more overwhelming.

This is all completely obvious.

Where do we start?

1. Lara, you are a hot chili mama, so I cannot possibly get angry with you.

2. I am sorry to see qualified admins leave. Alison’s departure was a major loss – so was yours, for that matter. These other guys – SirFozzie, Kevin, Barneca, Ddstretch – were a complete waste of space who brought nothing of value to Wikipedia. Their departure is reason for champagne, not bitter tea.

3. The press is NOT going to pick up any stories about insecure, inept and inane ex-admins who cannot cut the mustard on a volunteer web site.

4. What the web site needs who are people organized and detail oriented and who have training in dealing with editorial content, publishing protocol and human resources. Some fat slob who answers phones in a storage company is not the right person for that assignment. And some hyperactive teenager who obsesses over video games isn’t right, either. Face it, 99% of the admins lack the professional training and emotional stability to handle administrative work. Maybe Jimbo needs to do what IMDb does – hire professional editors/managers to run the site and to allow registered users to simply submit information and discuss content in forums. Really, look who is leading at RfA now -- Chris Cunningham, some Scottish asshole who admits to editing while drunk. Jimbo has money -- let him hire people (even part-time) who can do the job correctly.

5. Adminship is no big deal because Wikipedia is no big deal. It is a web site full of badly written articles – it is not a medical center. I have yet to meet anyone who doesn’t break out into laughter when I say the word “Wikipedia.” My experience is not unique, either.

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name:

[Jon Awbrey]

Still Clueless After All These Years (WP:SCAATY) —

A well designed con game — and Wikipedia is a very well designed con game — is designed to move any marks who begin to cache on off the board.

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[Newyorkbrad]

I think any statement an individual could make is destined to be lost in the noise.

I think a good statement to serve as a record as to why you resigned and/or retired is a positive. The more admins that drop for the same reasons, the more likely some change will eventually be pushed through. Sending a message is important, in my opinion.

I have made a statement of sorts, so that others will know my reasons. I can't see it having any impact whatsoever though, unless the resignations ramp up significantly.

Kevin

Although there has always been a high degree of turnover among all levels of Wikipedia participants, including the various types of functionaries, I can assure you that the recent raft of resignations, retirements, or semi-inactivities has been noted and is the subject of concern. Real life issues come first, of course, and so does the principle that one only gives volunteer time where one is having some fun and feels one is doing some good, but please don't feel that your departure hasn't been noticed and that your previous work hasn't been appreciated. That goes for several of you.

[Jon Awbrey]

Although there has always been a high degree of turnover among all levels of Wikipedia participants, including the various types of functionaries, I can assure you that the recent raft of resignations, retirements, or semi-inactivities has been noted and is the subject of concern. Real life issues come first, of course, and so does the principle that one only gives volunteer time where one is having some fun and feels one is doing some good, but please don't feel that your departure hasn't been noticed and that your previous work hasn't been appreciated. That goes for several of you.

An Unseen Hand gave Brad the Jimbo sign:
No More Barnstar — Gold Watch Next Time.

Take It Away, Mousetro !!!

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[One]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

[Kato]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

Or better still:

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/revert.jpg)

So spread the word. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) Wednesday is the official day when WP editors don't fix any problem that would long ago have been fixed, if the community didn't have so much free slave labor as to not worry their heads about labor-saving fixes to policy. Let's let the people who still believe in the policy, do the work themselves on that day-of-rest. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif)

[Jon Awbrey]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

Oh, that's original …

Original !?!

Original !!!

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/banned.gif)

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[gomi]

[Moderator's note: some off-topic arguing between Horse and Malleus was moved to the Tar Pit, and Moulton's latest offering of doggerel was also moved to the repository for such things. -- gomi]

[everyking]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

Are these people going to agree on what qualifies as an "improvement"? I don't think you and I would exactly agree on what sort of "tangible steps toward improvement" need to be taken.

[One]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/revert.jpg)

Yeah. Actually, I'm thinking that May 26 might be a better date for civil disobedience anyway. FR seems to be dead, so I might as well try to raise the BLP semi-protection project.

[LaraLove]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

Do it. I foresee you leaving, though. So don't make a pledge you won't keep.

[everyking]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/revert.jpg)

Yeah. Actually, I'm thinking that May 26 might be a better date for civil disobedience anyway. FR seems to be dead, so I might as well try to raise the BLP semi-protection project.

You are on the ArbCom; please don't subject us to talk to "civil disobedience". Instead of planning grand gestures predicated on the actions of others, you could use your role as one of the most powerful people on the project to actually bring about some change. As far as I can tell, you have done absolutely nothing in that regard since taking your seat.

[One]

Yeah. Actually, I'm thinking that May 26 might be a better date for civil disobedience anyway. FR seems to be dead, so I might as well try to raise the BLP semi-protection project.

You are on the ArbCom; please don't subject us to talk to "civil disobedience". Instead of planning grand gestures predicated on the actions of others, you could use your role as one of the most powerful people on the project to actually bring about some change. As far as I can tell, you have done absolutely nothing in that regard since taking your seat.

Jimbo himself can't bring about change. Policy creation is basically broken, and I'm even more convinced that the only way to get anything is to go do it. That's what I'm proposing.

[The Wales Hunter]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

I would support such a plan, particularly if a member of the Arbcom featured prominently.

[Lar]

You are on the ArbCom; please don't subject us to talk to "civil disobedience". Instead of planning grand gestures predicated on the actions of others, you could use your role as one of the most powerful people on the project to actually bring about some change. As far as I can tell, you have done absolutely nothing in that regard since taking your seat.

Jimbo himself can't bring about change. Policy creation is basically broken, and I'm even more convinced that the only way to get anything is to go do it. That's what I'm proposing.

You have a bully pulpit. Use it. Do, yes, but create policy by doing. If, for example, enough people close AfDs and sustain DRVs as default to delete, then et voila, default to delete for no consensus BLPs is policy.

[standixon]

That is the way of the world. As the officers are killed off, eventually you get to the point that the only people clueless enough to go into the meatgrinder, are teenagers. The origin of the word "infantry" is exactly what you might think from first looking at it: it doesn't mean children in diapers as in English, but it does refer to children with weapons.

Good Grief!!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

The word infantry comes from the fact that, on at least one occasion, part of the dowry of a Spanish princess was made up of regiments of foot soldiers. They were nicknamed infantry because the princess was an Infanta of Spain!

To the moderators/staff: Please can I have a nitpicker's smiley! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

This post has been edited by standixon:

[Jon Awbrey]

Webster's gives a different etymology, going back to Latin for boy or footsoldier.

But I really think it's because they don't get speaking parts in the movies.

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[standixon]

You are on the ArbCom; please don't subject us to talk to "civil disobedience". Instead of planning grand gestures predicated on the actions of others, you could use your role as one of the most powerful people on the project to actually bring about some change. As far as I can tell, you have done absolutely nothing in that regard since taking your seat.

Jimbo himself can't bring about change. Policy creation is basically broken, and I'm even more convinced that the only way to get anything is to go do it. That's what I'm proposing.

You have a bully pulpit. Use it. Do, yes, but create policy by doing. If, for example, enough people close AfDs and sustain DRVs as default to delete, then et voila, default to delete for no consensus BLPs is policy.

Lar I agree. If, and I think it is a big if, anything can be done to sort out Jimbo's empire then this suggestion might be the first step.

[everyking]

That is the way of the world. As the officers are killed off, eventually you get to the point that the only people clueless enough to go into the meatgrinder, are teenagers. The origin of the word "infantry" is exactly what you might think from first looking at it: it doesn't mean children in diapers as in English, but it does refer to children with weapons.

Good Grief!!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

The word infantry comes from the fact that, on at least one occasion, part of the dowry of a Spanish princess was made up of regiments of foot soldiers. They were nicknamed infantry because the princess was an Infanta of Spain!

To the moderators/staff: Please can I have a nitpicker's smiley! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Either way, it's a striking analogy to me--I think One here is like a guy with a rifle telling a bunch of unarmed guys to go over the top.

[Milton Roe]

That is the way of the world. As the officers are killed off, eventually you get to the point that the only people clueless enough to go into the meatgrinder, are teenagers. The origin of the word "infantry" is exactly what you might think from first looking at it: it doesn't mean children in diapers as in English, but it does refer to children with weapons.

Good Grief!!! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

The word infantry comes from the fact that, on at least one occasion, part of the dowry of a Spanish princess was made up of regiments of foot soldiers. They were nicknamed infantry because the princess was an Infanta of Spain!

To the moderators/staff: Please can I have a nitpicker's smiley! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

The word infantry was borrowed into other Romance languages from the Latin infantem, originally "a youth" who as an infante "foot soldier" served in groups composed of those who were too inexperienced or low in rank for cavalry. As a meaning for an organised type of combat troops the word dates to 1579 in the French infantrie and Spanish infanteria.[2] However, in military history it has become a common English term to apply to troops from earlier historical periods.

The basic idea is like squire -- at age 13 or 14 you're too young to give you a horse, but will consider you as an apprentice knight. No nitpicker's smiley for you.

[Caknuck]

Interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dds...s_administrator

Was this really necessary?

I for one think that your above resignation statement provides undeniably clear evidence that your decision to resign as an administrator was a very good one. Anyway, I wish you all the very best. — Aitias

Meh.

[Milton Roe]

Interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dds...s_administrator

Was this really necessary?

I for one think that your above resignation statement provides undeniably clear evidence that your decision to resign as an administrator was a very good one. Anyway, I wish you all the very best. — Aitias

Meh.

Sort of adds insult to injury, considering Aitias' role. But what do you expect?

[UseOnceAndDestroy]

Was this really necessary?

Yes - it's what he needs to do to score points in the game of wikipedia.

[Malleus]

Interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dds...s_administrator

Was this really necessary?

I for one think that your above resignation statement provides undeniably clear evidence that your decision to resign as an administrator was a very good one. Anyway, I wish you all the very best. — Aitias

Meh.

Sort of adds insult to injury, considering Aitias' role. But what do you expect?

Quite, Aitias is one unpleasant sob.

[LaraLove]

Was this really necessary?

I for one think that your above resignation statement provides undeniably clear evidence that your decision to resign as an administrator was a very good one. Anyway, I wish you all the very best. — Aitias

Meh.

Well, that could be taken as his detailed reasons for resigning leave readers with an understanding of why he's gone, and Aitias could be expressing that feeling... believing that DDstetch's resignation is a good choice for him.

Check me out, assuming good faith. Where's my barnstar? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)

[gadfly]

Quite, Aitias is one unpleasant sob.

I didn't realise Germans had such a well-developed sense of irony until I saw his comments on Malleus' and Ddstretch's talk pages and then read his explanation of his username.

[Alex]

Why not start a wikiproject about this? That is, make a list where users will pledge to walk out on some date if tangible steps toward improvement haven't been taken? I would make such a pledge.

What's a reasonable and appropriate date? I suggest the Seigenthaler anniversary: May 26. The four year anniversary of that former public servant being libeled by an IP address. If nothing happens before then, I quit.

So basically, a whole bunch of users go on strike on a certain day? Sounds like a good plan.

[EDIT] Just to be clear, I'm NOT being sarcastic, even though it might sound it (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif) It really sounds like a good idea.

[everyking]

So basically, a whole bunch of users go on strike on a certain day? Sounds like a good plan.

Not a good plan at all. A strike is an effective strategy when denying management the labor it needs for production. Management ordinarily cares about production because it seeks profit. How does that apply here? Wikipedia's "management", such as it is, doesn't care about production; these people care only about their respective places in the power structure (and in a few cases, the limelight). The only people who actually care about production are the ones actually producing. A better strategy is to move against the power structure directly, by challenging and rejecting its authority.

[Kato]

So basically, a whole bunch of users go on strike on a certain day? Sounds like a good plan.

Not a good plan at all. A strike is an effective strategy when denying management the labor it needs for production. Management ordinarily cares about production because it seeks profit. How does that apply here? Wikipedia's "management", such as it is, doesn't care about production; these people care only about their respective places in the power structure (and in a few cases, the limelight). The only people who actually care about production are the ones actually producing. A better strategy is to move against the power structure directly, by challenging and rejecting its authority.

What authority? You're not talking about the almost entirely irrelevant and marginal Arbitration Committee again?

Everyking, you are lost.

Take a cold bath or something. Go on a long holiday. Come back when you've cleared your mind.

[wikiwhistle]

Anyway, I'm wondering if it's time to let someone else have fun with the mop, and drift away. Let all the articles on my watchlist go, and let the vandals at em.

Remember that this is just a hobby. And not a very constructive one at that. Just do things on WP for fun/because you feel like it. Personally I'm trying to write some books, I'll edit a little bit if I see an odd bit wrong and feel like it, but I should be spending my time and headspace on things with more meaning/value. So I don't let it occupy a large portion of my mind. If you think about it, to do so, esp. to be attached to being an admin on some random site, and not even one with which you have a religious affiliation or something, or which could lead to something in the real world, is somewhat sad. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

And... it's done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sir...ministrator_bit.

Good for you. Don't just do it for the dramz and until people who you mainly only know through the internet beg you to come back- stick with it. Go out and make something more of your existence with that extra time or brain space.

Well done and good luck. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

[EricBarbour]

As the officers are killed off, eventually you get to the point that the only people clueless enough to go into the meatgrinder, are teenagers. The origin of the word "infantry" is exactly what you might think from first looking at it: it doesn't mean children in diapers as in English, but it does refer to children with weapons.

I believe the essential term is "cannon fodder".

Remember that this is just a hobby.

A hobby in which the resulting product is essentially intangible
and does not belong to the hobbyist....even people who self-publish
their bad poetry end up with something that can be copyrighted.

Wikipedia is a sweatshop. The slaves don't even get a bowl of
rice a day and a cot to sleep on, much less the satisfaction of
having created something permanent.....

[wikiwhistle]

I think their increasingly ridiculous farewells to adminship cruelly displays how they have completely lost track of reality in regard to where a volunteer hobby site like Wikipedia should fit into their lives. My message to SirFozzie, Barneca, Kevin and Ddstretch: come on, you slobs, grow up and get a life.

Exactly. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

People are dropping out now in disgust and frustration. Some of them after feeling overwhelmed. It doesn't get better from there without change. It only gets worse. With fewer principled people fighting the good fight, the dipshits win. The frustration grows, and with more shit to deal with, it's more overwhelming.

This is all completely obvious.

That's what happens. The obsessives and the evil care more and have more staying power than the rest in some spheres of this world. So just leave them to their games.

Other, more meaningful things are slowly improving anyway, such as BLP, regardless of who is leaving, as the bottom line is Jimbo runs the place and it's part of how he makes his livelihood, and others of the WMF are salaried and would take the flack or loose monies if they upset enough influential/rich people or people sued.

Jimbo himself can't bring about change. Policy creation is basically broken, and I'm even more convinced that the only way to get anything is to go do it. That's what I'm proposing.

Jimbo can do what he wants for en.wiki if he really wants to do it. As for 'just do it'; yes, that might work when you're an arb and if you can argue rationally for what you do.

Remember that this is just a hobby.

A hobby in which the resulting product is essentially intangible
and does not belong to the hobbyist....even people who self-publish
their bad poetry end up with something that can be copyrighted.

Exactly, it's worse than ephemeral. Publishing, even on lulu.com has more meaning and relevance to the writer. Even my hopeless attempts at dressmaking are more constructive.

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

[LessHorrid vanU]

I think any statement an individual could make is destined to be lost in the noise.

I think a good statement to serve as a record as to why you resigned and/or retired is a positive. The more admins that drop for the same reasons, the more likely some change will eventually be pushed through. Sending a message is important, in my opinion.

I have made a statement of sorts, so that others will know my reasons. I can't see it having any impact whatsoever though, unless the resignations ramp up significantly.

Kevin

Although there has always been a high degree of turnover among all levels of Wikipedia participants, including the various types of functionaries, I can assure you that the recent raft of resignations, retirements, or semi-inactivities has been noted and is the subject of concern. Real life issues come first, of course, and so does the principle that one only gives volunteer time where one is having some fun and feels one is doing some good, but please don't feel that your departure hasn't been noticed and that your previous work hasn't been appreciated. That goes for several of you.

Cool... So, should I make a very dramatic "I am not resigning" message on my talkpage, or is the ArbCom going to simply provide me with a "What? Still here?" Barnstar? Or are you going to pretend to ignore the couple of cock-ups I made with my sysop flags this last week as my reward?

(No disrespect to Foz and the others who have recently handed back the keys - and sometimes the pen as well - and whose decision I believe is in keeping with their genuine belief that it is for the best for everyone involved.)

[Moulton]

Lara reminds us what everybody knows.

People are dropping out now in disgust and frustration. Some of them after feeling overwhelmed. It doesn't get better from there without change. It only gets worse. With fewer principled people fighting the good fight, the dipshits win. The frustration grows, and with more shit to deal with, it's more overwhelming.

This is all completely obvious.

Everybody Knows — Leonard Cohen

[EricBarbour]

(No disrespect to Foz and the others who have recently handed back the keys - and sometimes the pen as well - and whose decision I believe is in keeping with their genuine belief that it is for the best for everyone involved.)

I would like to hear your personal reasons for remaining, even after seeing this
forum for the past several months, plus all those other admins quitting.

What kind of logical construct are you operating under, that keeps you in there,
battling sockpuppets and apparent sockpuppets for almost 3 years?

What have you got to show for it, other than the collegial camaraderie of your
fellow slaves (whom I'll bet you probably have never met in person)?

Did the WMF send you an honorary T-shirt or plaque, thanking you for all your hard work?
Not even a postcard, right?

[Malleus]

I think any statement an individual could make is destined to be lost in the noise.

I think a good statement to serve as a record as to why you resigned and/or retired is a positive. The more admins that drop for the same reasons, the more likely some change will eventually be pushed through. Sending a message is important, in my opinion.

I have made a statement of sorts, so that others will know my reasons. I can't see it having any impact whatsoever though, unless the resignations ramp up significantly.

Kevin

Although there has always been a high degree of turnover among all levels of Wikipedia participants, including the various types of functionaries, I can assure you that the recent raft of resignations, retirements, or semi-inactivities has been noted and is the subject of concern. Real life issues come first, of course, and so does the principle that one only gives volunteer time where one is having some fun and feels one is doing some good, but please don't feel that your departure hasn't been noticed and that your previous work hasn't been appreciated. That goes for several of you.

Cool... So, should I make a very dramatic "I am not resigning" message on my talkpage, or is the ArbCom going to simply provide me with a "What? Still here?" Barnstar? Or are you going to pretend to ignore the couple of cock-ups I made with my sysop flags this last week as my reward?

(No disrespect to Foz and the others who have recently handed back the keys - and sometimes the pen as well - and whose decision I believe is in keeping with their genuine belief that it is for the best for everyone involved.)

I'm surprised that anyone would take Newyorkbrad's statement seriously. Who exactly is concerned about the recent raft of resignations and so on? Whoever they are, if they're so concerned, why haven't they made those concerns public, and done something about it? I would go on, but I don't think there's any point in stirring through all that grease looking for the meat.

This post has been edited by Malleus:

[MBisanz]

Well I applaud those who are finally fed up with things enough to resign for actually going through with it and making a point by leaving a mark on

I still have the belief I can cause change, which is why I haven't joined you yet in the line for applesauce at the [[retirement home]]. When NOINDEX was first started, it got on to about 50,000 pages on its own, now thanks to my, CHL, Rootology, Lar, FT2, and NYB's constant nagging, it is on 377,774 pages and the User namespace is noindexed in the software.

So I've said my piece at User talk:Jimbo Wales#Action needed and will keep saying my piece until we have responsible change.

[Cla68]

Yeah. Actually, I'm thinking that May 26 might be a better date for civil disobedience anyway. FR seems to be dead, so I might as well try to raise the BLP semi-protection project.

You are on the ArbCom; please don't subject us to talk to "civil disobedience". Instead of planning grand gestures predicated on the actions of others, you could use your role as one of the most powerful people on the project to actually bring about some change. As far as I can tell, you have done absolutely nothing in that regard since taking your seat.

Jimbo himself can't bring about change. Policy creation is basically broken, and I'm even more convinced that the only way to get anything is to go do it. That's what I'm proposing.

I remember Kelly Martin said recently, if I remember right, that she would be impressed if the ArbCom, in a big power grab, made itself Wikipedia's formal governance committee instead of just an editor behavior court. I would support that if it brings more management control. One, if you're thinking of something along those lines, I would suggest that ArbCom establish, by fiat:

- A policy management committee with absolute power over policy governance.
- An article content Committee to be the final decision-maker in content disputes.
- At least three editor behavior adjudication committees to handle the way-too-high workload that the current ArbCom has, since the current one also has to manage desysop actions and manage oversight and checkuser actions.
- Make the current ArbCom the presiding committe over all of these, i.e. Wikipedia's configuration control board, but make elections to these committees independent of ArbCom control.
- Make adminship automatic for everyone with 2,000 edits or more and a clean block log, but then give Tony1's adminreview panel formal desysop authority.

You guys do have the power to do this. Remember, only Jimbo can remove one of you. That means that you can force editors to follow your will by blocking them if they refuse to, and no one but Jimbo can do anything to you for doing it. The teenagers and POV-pushers will go nuts if you do this, but more the better.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[privatemusings]

- A policy management committee with absolute power over policy governance.
- An article content Committee to be the final decision-maker in content disputes.
- At least three editor behavior adjudication committees to handle the way-too-high workload that the current ArbCom has, since the current one also has to manage desysop actions and manage oversight and checkuser actions.
- Make the current ArbCom the presiding committe over all of these, i.e. Wikipedia's configuration control board, but make elections to these committees independent of ArbCom control.
- Make adminship automatic for everyone with 2,000 edits or more and a clean block log, but then give Tony1's adminreview panel formal desysop authority.

Thoroughly approve - leadership is what's called for, and this would provide it, I reckon... well said Cla.

[everyking]

Yeah. Actually, I'm thinking that May 26 might be a better date for civil disobedience anyway. FR seems to be dead, so I might as well try to raise the BLP semi-protection project.

You are on the ArbCom; please don't subject us to talk to "civil disobedience". Instead of planning grand gestures predicated on the actions of others, you could use your role as one of the most powerful people on the project to actually bring about some change. As far as I can tell, you have done absolutely nothing in that regard since taking your seat.

Jimbo himself can't bring about change. Policy creation is basically broken, and I'm even more convinced that the only way to get anything is to go do it. That's what I'm proposing.

I remember Kelly Martin said recently, if I remember right, that she would be impressed if the ArbCom, in a big power grab, made itself Wikipedia's formal governance committee instead of just an editor behavior court. I would support that if it brings more management control. One, if you're thinking of something along those lines, I would suggest that ArbCom establish, by fiat:

- A policy management committee with absolute power over policy governance.
- An article content Committee to be the final decision-maker in content disputes.
- At least three editor behavior adjudication committees to handle the way-too-high workload that the current ArbCom has, since the current one also has to manage desysop actions and manage oversight and checkuser actions.
- Make the current ArbCom the presiding committe over all of these, i.e. Wikipedia's configuration control board.
- Make adminship automatic for everyone with 2,000 edits or more and a clean block log, but then give Tony1's adminreview panel formal desysop authority.

You guys do have the power to do this. Remember, only Jimbo can remove one of you. That means that you can force editors to follow your will by blocking them if they refuse to, and no one but Jimbo can do anything to you for doing it. The teenagers and POV-pushers will go nuts if you do this, but more the better.

Why would you think the ArbCom, which is the perfect representation of Wikipedia's dysfunctional governance, should acquire all this additional power? The ArbCom never gets anything right, and yet you think it should be entrusted with absolute power over everything. If I wanted Wikipedia to be destroyed, I would enthusiastically support your proposal.

[Cla68]

Why would you think the ArbCom, which is the perfect representation of Wikipedia's dysfunctional governance, should acquire all this additional power? The ArbCom never gets anything right, and yet you think it should be entrusted with absolute power over everything. If I wanted Wikipedia to be destroyed, I would enthusiastically support your proposal.

ArbCom is the closest thing Wikipedia has to a governance committee, and as I pointed out, the only body with authority to govern by fiat. Thus, they're the only ones who can get something done.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[everyking]

Why would you think the ArbCom, which is the perfect representation of Wikipedia's dysfunctional governance, should acquire all this additional power? The ArbCom never gets anything right, and yet you think it should be entrusted with absolute power over everything. If I wanted Wikipedia to be destroyed, I would enthusiastically support your proposal.

ArbCom is the closest thing Wikipedia has to a governance committee, and as I pointed out, the only body with authority to govern by fiat. Thus, they're the only ones who can get something done.

And I in turn argue that, since the ArbCom produces bad results now, a more powerful ArbCom would continue to produce bad results, but those results would be more harmful to the project because they would affect it much more broadly.

[Cla68]

Why would you think the ArbCom, which is the perfect representation of Wikipedia's dysfunctional governance, should acquire all this additional power? The ArbCom never gets anything right, and yet you think it should be entrusted with absolute power over everything. If I wanted Wikipedia to be destroyed, I would enthusiastically support your proposal.

ArbCom is the closest thing Wikipedia has to a governance committee, and as I pointed out, the only body with authority to govern by fiat. Thus, they're the only ones who can get something done.

And I in turn argue that, since the ArbCom produces bad results now, a more powerful ArbCom would continue to produce bad results, but those results would be more harmful to the project because they would affect it much more broadly.

I wouldn't say that they're producing only bad results. They have banned a few editors who deserved to be banned. They've helped correct the behavior of a few long-term, problem admins (at least so far, need any names?). Again, for sweeping changes to the project's governance structure in the near-term, they're the only ones able to do it.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[GlassBeadGame]

Stop kidding yourselves. If you can't pull off Flagged Revisions you can't pull off any sweeping reforms.


There is a game model of racial segregation. Take a checker board and fill it 1/2 with black pieces and 1/2 with white pieces assigned randomly with each piece controlled by an individual player. Instruct each players that they are to pursue exchanges not to "segregate" themselves but to simply pursue any arrangement that does not result in more than 50% of the adjoining being of the other color, something that might be characterized as "integration." Allow free exchanges of position of the pieces among players. The inevitable, if unintended, result: maximum segregation with all black pieces on one side and all white on the other and a well defined "boarder" in the middle.

Wkipedia is best explained as a game in which support on policy and content disputes is exchanged in the form of influence and alliances. This will cause players to place themselves around polar positions in approximately equal balance (in order to gain the best available exchanges of support and alliance). This will result in deadlock, especially under Wikipedia's "consensus" rules. Even if reform was to prevail in a fluke, or a momentary lapse into reason, it would be revisited and reversed as the opposing players regrouped in the next round.

[Malleus]

I wouldn't say that they're producing only bad results. They have banned a few editors who deserved to be banned. They've helped correct the behavior of a few long-term, problem admins (at least so far, need any names?). Again, for sweeping changes to the project's governance structure in the near-term, they're the only ones able to do it.

Perhaps the answer is then for the present ArbCom to plan its own exit strategy, as well as these suggested subcommittees? After all, who is prepared to trust a body hand-picked by Wales?

[Lar]

I remember Kelly Martin said recently, if I remember right, that she would be impressed if the ArbCom, in a big power grab, made itself Wikipedia's formal governance committee instead of just an editor behavior court. I would support that if it brings more management control. One, if you're thinking of something along those lines, I would suggest that ArbCom establish, by fiat:

- A policy management committee with absolute power over policy governance.
- An article content Committee to be the final decision-maker in content disputes.
- At least three editor behavior adjudication committees to handle the way-too-high workload that the current ArbCom has, since the current one also has to manage desysop actions and manage oversight and checkuser actions.
- Make the current ArbCom the presiding committe over all of these, i.e. Wikipedia's configuration control board, but make elections to these committees independent of ArbCom control.
- Make adminship automatic for everyone with 2,000 edits or more and a clean block log, but then give Tony1's adminreview panel formal desysop authority.

You guys do have the power to do this. Remember, only Jimbo can remove one of you. That means that you can force editors to follow your will by blocking them if they refuse to, and no one but Jimbo can do anything to you for doing it. The teenagers and POV-pushers will go nuts if you do this, but more the better.

Do it. Be leaders.

The consensus process hasn't worked to get the change needed, because 60% isn't "consensus" and a minority stands in the way of many much needed changes. It's broken and has been for a long time. Something else needs doing.

Do it. Be leaders.

[privatemusings]

Do it. Be leaders.

Yes we can!

Go the revolutionary committee :-)

This post has been edited by privatemusings:

[GlassBeadGame]

Do it. Be leaders.

Yes we can!

Go the revolutionary committee :-)

No, no you can't.

[Cla68]

Do it. Be leaders.

Yes we can!

Go the revolutionary committee :-)

No, no you can't.

Remember in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest when Nicholson's character bets money that he can pick up the concrete watering station and throw it through the window? Everyone bets against him and sure enough, he can't move it. As he walks away, however, he smiles and says, "At least I tried," representing that it is better to try and fail than to meekly accept an unsatisfactory status quo.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[GlassBeadGame]

Do it. Be leaders.

Yes we can!

Go the revolutionary committee :-)

No, no you can't.

Remember in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest when Nicholson's character bets a $100 dollars that he can pick up the concrete watering station and throw it through the window? Everyone bets against him and sure enough, he can't move it. As he walks away, however, he smiles and says, "At least I tried," representing that it is better to try and fail than to meekly accept an unsatisfactory status quo.

Not really. Better to run away from the asylum after they lobotomize your friends.

[Jon Awbrey]

Remember in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest when Nicholson's character bets money that he can pick up the concrete watering station and throw it through the window? Everyone bets against him and sure enough, he can't move it. As he walks away, however, he smiles and says, "At least I tried," representing that it is better to try and fail than to meekly accept an unsatisfactory status quo.

Yeah, and what do you call it when he tries the second time? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/frustrated.gif)

Cuckoo (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/blink.gif) Cuckoo (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif) Cuckoo (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[Cla68]

Remember in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest when Nicholson's character bets money that he can pick up the concrete watering station and throw it through the window? Everyone bets against him and sure enough, he can't move it. As he walks away, however, he smiles and says, "At least I tried," representing that it is better to try and fail than to meekly accept an unsatisfactory status quo.

Yeah, and what do you call it when he tries the second time? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/frustrated.gif)

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

Yes, he gets lobotomized, but then the Chief throws it through the window and makes a life changing decision as all the other inmates cheer. Progress did get made, although at a cost. Perhaps this is pressing the analogy too far to try to connect this to Wikipedia somehow. The point is, progress won't be made if someone doesn't risk causing chaos in the asylum and risking Nurse Ratched's wrath.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[GlassBeadGame]

Remember in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest when Nicholson's character bets money that he can pick up the concrete watering station and throw it through the window? Everyone bets against him and sure enough, he can't move it. As he walks away, however, he smiles and says, "At least I tried," representing that it is better to try and fail than to meekly accept an unsatisfactory status quo.

Yeah, and what do you call it when he tries the second time? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/frustrated.gif)

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

Yes, he gets lobotomized, but then the Chief throws it through the window and makes a life changing decision as all the other inmates cheer. Progress did get made, although at a cost.

The point is he left the asylum. If I really need to break it down...RPMcM's gift was to show he could do it all along. You want to stay and fight with Nurse Rachet.

[Jon Awbrey]

And now you know the Diff between Life and Art …

Well, probably not …

Ja Ja (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/boing.gif)

[Milton Roe]

The point is he left the asylum. If I really need to break it down...RPMcM's gift was to show he could do it all along. You want to stay and fight with Nurse Rachet.

No, I think Big Nurse Rachet followed along right after her own.... procedure. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif) She's not nearly as scary now. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/bored.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/bored.gif)

[everyking]

Do it. Be leaders.

Yes we can!

Go the revolutionary committee :-)

Unilateral assumption of absolute authority by people already in positions of authority is not the answer. I think part of the problem here is the failure to distinguish between judicial and legislative roles--Wikipedia doesn't have anything to function in a legislative role, and it suffers because of that, but the answer is not to simply invest the ArbCom with legislative power. It would be more sensible to have an election to produce a legislative decision-making body--its authority would be derived solely from the community, not Jimbo and/or the ArbCom, and such a governance structure would fit Wikipedia's values far better than ArbCom fiat.

[Kevin]

Do it. Be leaders.

Yes we can!

Go the revolutionary committee :-)

Unilateral assumption of absolute authority by people already in positions of authority is not the answer. I think part of the problem here is the failure to distinguish between judicial and legislative roles--Wikipedia doesn't have anything to function in a legislative role, and it suffers because of that, but the answer is not to simply invest the ArbCom with legislative power. It would be more sensible to have an election to produce a legislative decision-making body--its authority would be derived solely from the community, not Jimbo and/or the ArbCom, and such a governance structure would fit Wikipedia's values far better than ArbCom fiat.

It may not be the answer - but continuing down the current path is also not the answer. Given that the community cannot even decide simple things, having the community come up with some other governance system will also fail.

Kevin

[One]

It may not be the answer - but continuing down the current path is also not the answer. Given that the community cannot even decide simple things, having the community come up with some other governance system will also fail.

Kevin

I think ArbCom is the only body that could create other structures. I agree that a separate legislative body would be ideal, but since the community can't even decide on a modest checkuser/OS board, I have no confidence that they could create much more radical structures.

ArbCom and Jimbo would have to either create the structures themselves, or maybe appoint a constitutional convention of some sort. Nothing will emerge from community "consensus." There's no reason that ArbCom can't claim authority in order to delegate it to an independent body; I think that's precisely what it should do.

[everyking]

It may not be the answer - but continuing down the current path is also not the answer. Given that the community cannot even decide simple things, having the community come up with some other governance system will also fail.

Kevin

I think ArbCom is the only body that could create other structures. I agree that a separate legislative body would be ideal, but since the community can't even decide on a modest checkuser/OS board, I have no confidence that they could create much more radical structures.

ArbCom and Jimbo would have to either create the structures themselves, or maybe appoint a constitutional convention of some sort. Nothing will emerge from community "consensus." There's no reason that ArbCom can't claim authority in order to delegate it to an independent body; I think that's precisely what it should do.

If the ArbCom creates and controls anything, that thing will not work constructively for the benefit of the project. The ArbCom has been around for a long time--over five years--and its history demonstrates beyond all doubt that it represents all the failings of Wikipedia administration. If you rely on the Czar to give you a Duma, he'll give you a worthless Duma. Create a Duma and forget the Czar. People imagine that the community can do nothing because it requires "consensus", and no one really knows what a consensus is. Well, why should it require consensus? The idea of consensus in everything is a severe misapplication of principle. Just forget it and start operating on the basis of majorities.

[Alison]

Yes, he gets lobotomized, but then the Chief throws it through the window and makes a life changing decision as all the other inmates cheer. Progress did get made, although at a cost.

The point is he left the asylum. If I really need to break it down...RPMcM's gift was to show he could do it all along. You want to stay and fight with Nurse Rachet.

(IMG:http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu328/alliewiki/ratched.jpg)

... only way is out, I'm afraid (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif)

[Peter Damian]

- A policy management committee with absolute power over policy governance.
- An article content Committee to be the final decision-maker in content disputes.
- At least three editor behavior adjudication committees to handle the way-too-high workload that the current ArbCom has, since the current one also has to manage desysop actions and manage oversight and checkuser actions.
- Make the current ArbCom the presiding committe over all of these, i.e. Wikipedia's configuration control board, but make elections to these committees independent of ArbCom control.
- Make adminship automatic for everyone with 2,000 edits or more and a clean block log, but then give Tony1's adminreview panel formal desysop authority.

And particularly the one in bold.

[EricBarbour]

This is a nice little daydream, but I have serious doubts that
the current Arbcom has the guts to seize authority.

Want real change? Demand Jimbo's retirement.
As long as he is the little boy-king, nothing will move.

[Bottled_Spider]

Remember in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest when Nicholson's character bets money that he can pick up the concrete watering station and throw it through the window? Everyone bets against him and sure enough, he can't move it. As he walks away, however, he smiles and says, "At least I tried," representing that it is better to try and fail than to meekly accept an unsatisfactory status quo.

Thanks! Comparing McMurphy's struggles against The System to the possibility of an ArbCon wresting power from Jimbo is priceless. Too funny! McMurphy was a guy who, in his own words liked to "fight and fuck too much". Those clowns you're placing too much hope in are a bunch of spineless, useless arseholes. Damn, man!

[Moulton]

What fascinates me about this issue is that it reflects the same issue in the culture at large.

In Berlin, adjacent to the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, there is a remarkable public garden that honors an early pioneer of science education. Comenius Garten is the handiwork of one man, Henning Vierck, who, like Jimbo, relies on a volunteer crew to clean up after the inevitable vandals.

What's different is that Vierck ensures that Comenius Garten is open to all, and has no rules and no cops to shoo away the vandals. His volunteer crew cleans up the messes, but doesn't scold, bar, or boot the vandals, or otherwise affix stigmatizing scarlet letters to their outerwear.

I asked a correspondent who lives in Berlin and frequents Comenius Garten whether the volunteer crew get burnt out the same as we are seeing on Wikipedia.

Here is our ensuing conversation.

In particular, he writes:

You can't solve everything with rules. But you can get a lot of things on a good track with good rules.

Or so is a common German belief.

Which is why I find it all the more amazing and impressive that Henning Vierck manages his garden without any explicit rules!

Every public park in Germany has signs which give the rules of the garden and the opening hours, often at every gate.

But Comenius Garten doesn't! And it works! It's a miracle.

But a miracle that is based on hard work and a lot of stamina.

[One]

Want real change? Demand Jimbo's retirement.
As long as he is the little boy-king, nothing will move.

Actually, I think the reverse is probably true. I doubt WP:BLP would even exist if it wasn't for extra-community leadership. Jimbo and the foundation are not wedded to the status quo--CONSENSUS is.

We should demand CONSENSUS' retirement. It outlived its usefulness in 2002.

[Sarcasticidealist]

We should demand CONSENSUS' retirement. It outlived its usefulness in 2002.

I think it still has its place as an arbiter of small, local disputes (for both content and policy). But you're quite right that on broader issues is basically a lockdown on the status quo.

My problem with these various forms of civil disobedience being proposed is that I'm not at all clear who we're supposed to be demanding things from. If nobody has the power to make a decision, then demanding a decision is sort of silly (it's like that scene in Arrested Development when everybody gets a "Speech!" chant going without having any idea who it is who's supposed to speak).