Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ Bureaucracy _ Editile Dysfunction

Posted by: Jonny Cache

Desperately Seeking Scapegoats

The Usual Suscepts converted a discussion on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Expert_rebellion&oldid=73986894, originally a salon brawl taking place on one of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dbuckner's subpages, to a soi-disant "Brain-Storming" page on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Expert_Retention&oldid=78652893, and then finally co-opted the whole earnest call for reform into the latest fad in outsiding agitators, a new brand guideline on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Disruptive_editing&oldid=78435011.

It's a Killer ...

Jonny cool.gif

PS. Could some kindly staff person please fix the subtitle? — I have real bad OCD (Optical Character Digitization), and I'm sure that it will send me off the deep end to keep seeing those typos. It should read:

Gratia in futuro,

Jonny cool.gif

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Sun 1st October 2006, 1:04am) *
Could some kindly staff person please fix the subtitle -- I have real bad OCD, and I'm sure that it will send me off the deep end to keep seeing those typos.

No luck - the "Edit Title" feature allows for even fewer characters than the "Add Topic" feature. I was only able to get as far as "If you have an editor lasting longer tha" before it maxed out.

How about something like "Your edit count could be 3 inches longer"?

Btw, I like the edit summary in the initial post of the "Disruptive Editiing" policy page:
QUOTE
Initial proposal to actively discipline tendentious users

Damn those tendentious users! Break out the whips and chains! We shall make them submit to our will!

Posted by: guy

QUOTE
Initial proposal to actively discipline tendentious users

That's a split infinitive. Surely good editors don't make mistakes like that.


QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 1st October 2006, 8:34am) *

Damn those tendentious users! Break out the whips and chains! We shall make them submit to our will!

Oh dear - Somey's been talking to Hogtied and Taxwoman again.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 1st October 2006, 3:34am) *

How about something like "Your edit count could be 3 inches longer"?


Somey,

I will not speculate on the parameter envy or the hypo-textual circumcism complex of the software ingenue who, Medusa-like, cast this particular form of sententious castration in hard-wired stone, but merely accept your suggestion as a suitable compromise-formation.

Jonny cool.gif

Posted by: Joey

/

Posted by: Jonny Cache

What we've got here is yet another P&G from the same Porchesian litterature. It disporks the classical syn-tactics of Double Speak, the language in which all double standards are written, and it falls write in line with that utterly confabulous post*mudern genre that includes http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules&oldid=79029331 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_binding_decisions. Wikipilgrims and Wikipledges are constantly admonsished to doublespeak the doublespeak in hushed and reverent tones, with all due mumble-jumbled mystification of its "long tradition" (length matters) and its "deep and subtle meaning" (DASM), a textual macramé rapped up in paralogical knots and hyper-liturgical hermenooses that can of course be untangled for the masses by no one short (length matters) of the inner cyclopedia of high priests and pythonesses.

Etc., Etc., Etc.,

Jonny cool.gif