Sat 30th July 2011, 11:48pm
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sat 30th July 2011, 4:06pm)
I unblocked Mick six months ago, the purpose was to see if he and Wikipedia could work out a way of working together. That's evidently failed now. Keeping the dialogue going is simply using Mick as sport for the entertainment of trolls like you - just in the same way you are cheering him on from your peanut gallery to bite back. Wikipedia isn't for cock fighting, and Mick doesn't deserve you treating him like one
I appreciate Doc's intention in that unblock. However, this is typical Wikipedia wishful thinking. It fails, because nobody sticks around and makes it work. It is assumed that a user who has had difficulty working with the community (or who may have been harassed, and it can be impossible to disentangle who did what and who did it first) will magically change if "given another chance." This will only work rarely.
And Wikipedia generally is not interested in what will work.
As to the rest of it, I agree about cock fighting. I appreciate Mick's passionate expression of his anger and disappointment, but it's also legitimate to shut it down. I don't know if Mick has an account here, but he can certainly be invited.
And there is Wikiversity. Hey, Mick! Do you know that there is a place where you could build resources, and structure, and clean things up to your heart's content? Yeah, you'll have to respect the rights of others, but TANSTAAFL. You won't be harassed there, people will work with you. At least I will!
To get yourself blocked on Wikiversity, you'd have to work really, really hard. There are no scarce resources, i.e., one page per topic, to fight over there. We can have many pages on a topic. If you want to fight, well, Wikiversity won't be for you. But if you do want to actually work together (or alone) to build things, the original wiki vision, Wikiversity is the place where that can happen. Wikiversity resources can be attached to Wikiversity articles, it's a way to vastly extend what's possible. Some Wikiversity pages can even be "owned," properly done.
WV has been called the Island of Banned Users, by those with narrow vision, who think of Wikipedia as the Center of the Universe. That's a trap. Wikiversity is, potentially, to Wikipedia, as a university is to an encyclopedia. Yeah, an encyclopedia is an interesting thing, but you wouldn't go to an encyclopedia to really learn about a topic deeply. Which is larger, in the end, an encyclopedia or a university and its library of resources?
That vision has only been implemented to a small degree. It's new, and opportunities abound. Come and join us! Experienced editors can really help. I hope some WR'ers will be inspired to take a look around Wikiversity. Just, please, realize that we aren't Wikipedia, we are highly inclusive, as is common in academia. Our traditions of academic freedom are strong. Yes, there are limits, and some have pushed beyond limits. All three global bans that I know of were in some way related to Wikiversity.
But my study of self-reversion, which included the record of my socking on Wikipedia and the community's response, was just determined a Keep at Wikiversity Requests for deletion. There were no personal attacks on that page, and it wasn't being used to "organize" disruption, merely to document what had already happened and how the community was responding, which is rarely done. The analysis hasn't been done yet, but the documentation has already generated some useful changes at Wikipedia, and more might come.
There is no other place in the WMF family of wikis where this kind of thing would be appropriate, even if done properly. Wiki studies. And how we could possibly reform the wikis without studying how they operate is completely beyond me. Completely hopeless, it would be.
It's not hopeless.