A Scientific Dissent from Wikipedianism, A Crockwork Orange Options

[Moulton]

One of the things that the Public needs to ask is — not just why this level of deception and defamation is tolerated in Wikipedia — but why that segment of the population who finds it "entertaining" is actually preferred to more mature and responsible demographics.

When you can answer that question, then you will have a clue to the previous array of puzzles.

This may seem like a poor analogy, and maybe it is, but they asked the same kinds of questions back in the 1960's, particularly in the UK, during the rise of "pop stars" and other types of media celebrities. The adult population was completely dismayed that kids, as well as some of the more culturally-literate, "hip" adults, were turning their collective backs on traditional culture and social mores in favor of what they saw as a primitive, uncivilized, "wild in the streets" mentality that eventually came to be known as "counter-culture," once it got to be reasonably well established.

There was nothing particularly wrong with the idea of shaking up the traditional culture, but many people saw very clearly how large groups of younger, politically inexperienced people could be manipulated by corrupt elements working within the (now widely-hated) "establishment" to turn them into what might ultimately amount to a fascist mob.

Movies were made about this. Most of them, such as Privilege (1967), were terrible, and lacked subtlety as well as decent plots. But at that time, mass media was in its infancy, still limited by technology we would now see as hopelessly primitive, and most people were only beginning to understand its potential. Anyone trying this today would certainly take advantage of the internet, with its promise of relatively safe anonymity and attendant lack of accountability, to build up a base of followers among people of all ages whose feelings of disenfranchisement and disempowerment have been brewing for years, during a period in which the rich have gotten richer than ever before, and everyone else has been left out.

And now that it has finally become clear that the "establishment" has been almost completely corrupt all along, has practically bankrupted the world economy with their short-term, greed-obsessed thinking, has stolen elections, and has pursued dangerous, even imperialistic military adventurism to no good purpose, what better time for the leadership (assuming there is any) of such groups to make their move?

Mind you, Wikipedia and its sister sites are only a small part of the overall picture, and it has yet to be proven that internet-based communities can actually wield political power. But if they can, I think we just have to hope that those who dominate the current Wikipedia community are clearly in the minority within the larger framework of the groups weilding such power, because if they aren't, we might actually be in worse trouble than we are now. (Assuming that's even possible!)

I did have a film in mind as The Best Illustration Of The Thematic Question —

It was of course A Clockwork Orange.

Jon

That's a clever and appropriate cultural reference.

I wish I had thought of it first.

[Moulton]

Title: English Wiki RfC
Artist: Montana Mouse
Composer: Tom T. Hall and Barsoom Tork Associates
Midi:Harper Valley PTA
YouTube: Harper Valley PTA

I want to tell you all a story 'bout an MIT Professor's grief
She had a research colleague who reviewed her English Wiki BLP
Well her friend came by one afternoon and didn't even stop to take a pee
He said, "Roz, I got a note here from the English Wiki RfC"

The note said, "Ms. Picard, you're signing things that we don't like
It's reported you've been praying and a-runnin' 'round with Jesus freaks
And we don't believe you ought to be teaching anyone this awful way"
It was signed by ConfuciusOrnis, for the English Wiki RfC.

Well, it happened that the RfC was gonna close that very afternoon
They were sure surprised when Moulton came in riding on a singing broom
And as he strode up to the subpage, I can still recall the words he had to say
He said, "I'd like to address this meeting of the English Wiki RfC."

"Well, there's OrangeMarlin sittin' there and seven times he spat upon my face
Odd nature seems to Skip around these blogs without the slightest touch of grace
And FeloniousMonk, can you tell us why Betacommando has a frown?
And shouldn't Jim Schuler be told to keep his Haldol off the grimy streets of town?

"Well, Baegis couldn't be here 'cause he trolled too late at Moulton's page last night
And if you note KillerPuppy's tags, you'll find her mind is wallowing in fright
Then you have the nerve to tell me you think that as a writer I'm not fit
Well, this is just a Cluster B shop and you're all English Wiki hypocrites"

No I wouldn't put you on because it really did, it happened just this way
The day that Moulton socked it to the English Wiki RfC
The day that Moulton socked it to the English Wiki RfC

CopyClef 2008 Tom T. Hall and Barsoom Tork Associates
Resurrection Hackware. All wrongs reversed.

[Moulton]

Title: Jimbo Wales, Superstar
Artist: Moulton
Composer: Tim Rice, Andrew Lloyd Weber, and Barsoom Tork Associates
Midi: Jesus Christ, Superstar

Every time I look at you I don't understand
Why you let the site you (co-)founded get so out of hand.

You'd have managed better if you'd had it planned.
Why'd you make such a stupid move to have Moulton banned?

If you'd thought it through you could have taught a whole nation
The art of dramaturgy with psycho-communication.

Don't you get me wrong.
I only want to know...

Jimbo Wales, Superstar,
Are you really as nuts as we think you are?

Jimbo Wales, now disgraced,
Whose talk page has your crew defaced?

Tell me what you think about your friends on the beat.
Would you like to have a Russian masseuse beat your meat?
Was IDCab was where it's at? Was FM your fave star?
Could Sue Gardner move a mountain, or was that just PR?
Did you dress like the Red Queen? Was that a mistake, or
Did you know that Essjay's fall would be a heart breaker?

Don't you get me wrong.
I only want to know...

Jimbo Wales, Superstar,
Are you really as nuts as they say you are?

Jimbo Wales, now disgraced,
Whose BLP has your site defaced?

CopyClef 2009 Tim Rice, Andrew Lloyd Weber, and Barsoom Tork Associates.
Resurrection Hackware. All wrongs reversed.

[Digwuren the Grey]

Is there some reason we can't all use open collaboration, rather than have competing factions compounded by awkard-to-use back-channel PMs, etc, in a silly effort to conceal who is or isn't exchanging messages with me?

Good question.

Yes there is. The reason consists mostly of two halves: on one hand, there are people on Wikipedia who seek to interpret normal collaboration of "the other side" in light of bad faith. On the other hand, there are people on Wikipedia who, based on a simplistic view on epistemology, encourage treating variation from certain (varying) simplistic work processes as heresy.

Since the simplistic "holy" work processes do not match most Real Life encyclopædic processes, normal and reasonable work processes are anathema to Wikipedia's powerful gestalt. Thus, people who care about results of their work would do wisely to keep that work out of eyes of the Inquisition, or they will be condemned.

In Bismarck's sense, imagine people who enjoy sausages but have very strong, yet absurd, ideas how sausages should be made. If such people should attain control of Sausagepedia, experienced sausage-makers will have a hard choice to make, and keeping long-nosed Sausagepedians out of the kitchen is one of the only choices that permit continuation of traditional sausagecraft while not forcing a conflict between reality and Sausagepedian unworkable "standard processes".