The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Sjc, User number 150
tarantino
post Wed 25th November 2009, 4:14am
Post #1


the Dude abides
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,440
Joined: Mon 30th Jul 2007, 11:41pm
Member No.: 2,143



From Meta:

QUOTE
After a number of recent unpleasant experiences with Wikipedia, I am of the opinion that I no longer wish to be associated in any way with the project whatsoever; I can only reflect on what a pleasure it was in the early days and what a deeply divided, hostile and abusive community it has now become. I request herewith admin status removal as I won't be needing it again. Sjc 09:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


He's unhappiness came to a head when an article he created was tagged for speedy deletion a minute after creation by a sockpuppet.
He says he will document his experience at the strategy task force on community health next week.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Wed 25th November 2009, 5:39am
Post #2


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(tarantino @ Tue 24th November 2009, 11:14pm) *

From Meta:

QUOTE
After a number of recent unpleasant experiences with Wikipedia, I am of the opinion that I no longer wish to be associated in any way with the project whatsoever; I can only reflect on what a pleasure it was in the early days and what a deeply divided, hostile and abusive community it has now become. I request herewith admin status removal as I won't be needing it again. Sjc 09:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


He's unhappiness came to a head when an article he created was tagged for speedy deletion a minute after creation by a sockpuppet.
He says he will document his experience at the strategy task force on community health next week.


Shame, he could have sold that admin account.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Wed 25th November 2009, 6:13am
Post #3


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



Looking over the contribs for Mr. Sjc (T-C-L-K-R-D) , it looks like he's taken lengthy breaks before, most recently from Oct. 30, 2008 thru April 9, 2009, following what appears to have been a talk-page blanking on Aug. 8, 2008. However, I don't see anything that would have precipitated that reaction... In fact, the static he got over the Authonomy (T-H-L-K-D) article (which is hardly something they should be deleting) seems to have been a fairly isolated incident.

My guess is he just outgrew the place, and reached the point where he just needed a decent excuse to quit. Like Jimbo says, people will stop bothering when it stops being fun, and it's hard to imagine people having much fun on Wikipedia. (That's always been the case, but now it's a little more obvious than it was.)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dogbiscuit
post Wed 25th November 2009, 9:19am
Post #4


Could you run through Verifiability not Truth once more?
********

Group: Members
Posts: 2,972
Joined: Tue 4th Dec 2007, 12:42am
From: The Midlands
Member No.: 4,015



I thnk the "stopped being fun" is the important aspect.

It stopped being fun when the reference police were given overarching powers. Before then, the reference was the trump card, but anyone could put anything they liked up. That meant that, in the world of how crowd sourcing was meant to work, someone could put their interesting snippet into an article, and then it would get knocked into shape. A sensible contribution would remain.

Now there is no incentive, in fact on a bad day a newbie will simply get banned for doing what they were asked to do - getting stuck in and adding their little piece to the sum of all human speculation.

Of course, although we now suspect that random editing by the human race does not result in a useful encyclopedia, what has been lost is a corrective mechanism to the sum of all human speculation being in the hands of a few misguided individuals, which is the net result of having the WikiStasi around. And clearly, being the WikiStasi is pretty disillusioning too, so a lose all round then.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mentifisto
post Fri 27th November 2009, 1:08pm
Post #5


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue 17th Nov 2009, 11:20am
Member No.: 15,414



Yep, it's been done an hour ago.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nerd
post Fri 27th November 2009, 1:40pm
Post #6


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat 30th May 2009, 7:52pm
From: Cloud cuckoo land
Member No.: 11,945



QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 25th November 2009, 6:13am) *

My guess is he just outgrew the place, and reached the point where he just needed a decent excuse to quit. Like Jimbo says, people will stop bothering when it stops being fun, and it's hard to imagine people having much fun on Wikipedia. (That's always been the case, but now it's a little more obvious than it was.)


He has been there for eight and a half years... it's not like it didn't take long.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th 5 17, 3:51pm