FA Director's long-term absence

everyking · Unread post by **everyking** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:54 pm

Raul654, the Featured Article Director, has not made a single edit in well over two months. How is it that he's kept the title, prominently identified at the top of the WP:FAC page, without doing any actual work? Bear in mind that Raul was never voted into the position or approved by the community in any way--he has kept the job all these years simply because so few people have bothered to object to it (if people aren't worked up enough to start hollering, that must mean there's a consensus in Raul's favor, according to Raul's logic). Well, now he isn't doing anything. His "delegates" are apparently doing all the work. Isn't that strange? I figured somewhere people were discussing this, treating it as a problem, but I could find no discussion. I couldn't even find any notice from Raul that he was on wikibreak, that inquiries should be directed elsewhere. I hope he isn't ill. But shouldn't the matter be addressed somehow?

Unread post by **tarantino** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:29 pm

everyking wrote:Raul654, the Featured Article Director, has not made a single edit in well over two months. How is it that he's kept the title, prominently identified at the top of the WP:FAC page, without doing any actual work? Bear in mind that Raul was never voted into the position or approved by the community in any way--he has kept the job all these years simply because so few people have bothered to object to it (if people aren't worked up enough to start hollering, that must mean there's a consensus in Raul's favor, according to Raul's logic). Well, now he isn't doing anything. His "delegates" are apparently doing all the work. Isn't that strange? I figured somewhere people were discussing this, treating it as a problem, but I could find no discussion. I couldn't even find any notice from Raul that he was on wikibreak, that inquiries should be directed elsewhere. I hope he isn't ill. But shouldn't the matter be addressed somehow?

Raul654 left because he got disgusted with "teh community's" response to the Today's featured article/requests‎ trolling by the now-banned misfit Jack Merridrew.

everyking · Unread post by **everyking** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:51 pm

tarantino wrote:
everyking wrote:Raul654, the Featured Article Director, has not made a single edit in well over two months. How is it that he's kept the title, prominently identified at the top of the WP:FAC page, without doing any actual work? Bear in mind that Raul was never voted into the position or approved by the community in any way--he has kept the job all these years simply because so few people have bothered to object to it (if people aren't worked up enough to start hollering, that must mean there's a consensus in Raul's favor, according to Raul's logic). Well, now he isn't doing anything. His "delegates" are apparently doing all the work. Isn't that strange? I figured somewhere people were discussing this, treating it as a problem, but I could find no discussion. I couldn't even find any notice from Raul that he was on wikibreak, that inquiries should be directed elsewhere. I hope he isn't ill. But shouldn't the matter be addressed somehow?
Raul654 left because he got disgusted with "teh community's" response to the Today's featured article/requests‎ trolling by the now-banned misfit Jack Merridrew.

So long, then. Someone who wants to do the work should get the title.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Mon Nov 05, 2012 11:49 pm

Here's a thought: Mark got his BS degree in 2004. For EIGHT YEARS, he has been "working on his PhD" in computer science.
I wonder if his faculty advisor told him to stop fucking around with Wikipedia, and finish his degree work. (Just wondering.)

everyking · Unread post by **everyking** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:37 pm

tarantino wrote:
everyking wrote:Raul654, the Featured Article Director, has not made a single edit in well over two months. How is it that he's kept the title, prominently identified at the top of the WP:FAC page, without doing any actual work? Bear in mind that Raul was never voted into the position or approved by the community in any way--he has kept the job all these years simply because so few people have bothered to object to it (if people aren't worked up enough to start hollering, that must mean there's a consensus in Raul's favor, according to Raul's logic). Well, now he isn't doing anything. His "delegates" are apparently doing all the work. Isn't that strange? I figured somewhere people were discussing this, treating it as a problem, but I could find no discussion. I couldn't even find any notice from Raul that he was on wikibreak, that inquiries should be directed elsewhere. I hope he isn't ill. But shouldn't the matter be addressed somehow?
Raul654 left because he got disgusted with "teh community's" response to the Today's featured article/requests‎ trolling by the now-banned misfit Jack Merridrew.

Out of curiosity, what exactly was this trolling? What was the community's response, and why was Raul so disgusted by it? If this guy was banned, then it seems like Raul got his way, so why is he so upset?

dogbiscuit · Unread post by **dogbiscuit** » Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:59 pm

everyking wrote:Out of curiosity, what exactly was this trolling? What was the community's response, and why was Raul so disgusted by it? If this guy was banned, then it seems like Raul got his way, so why is he so upset?

Raul was pissed because it was suggested that he was not acting properly by using admin tools to win arguments with dissenters. Raul claimed that as he was in charge of FA, he could do what he liked with the tools in the FA area, and he was somewhat aggrieved that people should dare to disagree with that.

Just another little Wiki-fiefdom. Think editing policy and going up against SlimVirgin a couple of years ago and you'll get the drift. Not worth worrying about.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:56 pm

dogbiscuit wrote:
everyking wrote:Out of curiosity, what exactly was this trolling? What was the community's response, and why was Raul so disgusted by it? If this guy was banned, then it seems like Raul got his way, so why is he so upset?
Raul was pissed because it was suggested that he was not acting properly by using admin tools to win arguments with dissenters. Raul claimed that as he was in charge of FA, he could do what he liked with the tools in the FA area, and he was somewhat aggrieved that people should dare to disagree with that.

Just another little Wiki-fiefdom. Think editing policy and going up against SlimVirgin a couple of years ago and you'll get the drift. Not worth worrying about.

Actually, no, I disagree. This is actually an interesting illustration of how apparently abusive use of administrative tools by a long-time administrator was checked by community objections. I realize that is a counternarrative to the one favored at this venue, but it is a fact that tool abuse, assuming it was a problem in the past, is a lessening problem today. There are fewer administrators, true, but there is also less tolerance for misuse of administrative tools and far fewer abusive administrators.

RfB

Anroth · Unread post by **Anroth** » Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:11 pm

dogbiscuit wrote:
everyking wrote:Out of curiosity, what exactly was this trolling? What was the community's response, and why was Raul so disgusted by it? If this guy was banned, then it seems like Raul got his way, so why is he so upset?
Raul was pissed because it was suggested that he was not acting properly by using admin tools to win arguments with dissenters. Raul claimed that as he was in charge of FA, he could do what he liked with the tools in the FA area, and he was somewhat aggrieved that people should dare to disagree with that.

Just another little Wiki-fiefdom. Think editing policy and going up against SlimVirgin a couple of years ago and you'll get the drift. Not worth worrying about.

In addition to Randy's comments, there was also the issue that the FA contributers basically endorsed Raul's 'ownership' as FA Director to take certain arbitary actions. They were used to it, and agreed with it over an extended period. So Raul had no outside influence telling him what he was doing wouldnt fly in the wider Wikipedia community. When it went to the noticeboards and he got a short sharp lesson in what the wider community thinks of 'abusing admin tools', he couldnt take it and flounced off.

The blame shouldnt lie entirely with him however, it partly lays with the FA clique who tacitly endorsed and approved his actions. Its part of why subverting all the little projects and communities is remarkably easy.

dogbiscuit · Unread post by **dogbiscuit** » Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:36 pm

Anroth wrote:
dogbiscuit wrote:
everyking wrote:Out of curiosity, what exactly was this trolling? What was the community's response, and why was Raul so disgusted by it? If this guy was banned, then it seems like Raul got his way, so why is he so upset?
Raul was pissed because it was suggested that he was not acting properly by using admin tools to win arguments with dissenters. Raul claimed that as he was in charge of FA, he could do what he liked with the tools in the FA area, and he was somewhat aggrieved that people should dare to disagree with that.

Just another little Wiki-fiefdom. Think editing policy and going up against SlimVirgin a couple of years ago and you'll get the drift. Not worth worrying about.
In addition to Randy's comments, there was also the issue that the FA contributers basically endorsed Raul's 'ownership' as FA Director to take certain arbitary actions. They were used to it, and agreed with it over an extended period. So Raul had no outside influence telling him what he was doing wouldnt fly in the wider Wikipedia community. When it went to the noticeboards and he got a short sharp lesson in what the wider community thinks of 'abusing admin tools', he couldnt take it and flounced off.

The blame shouldnt lie entirely with him however, it partly lays with the FA clique who tacitly endorsed and approved his actions. Its part of why subverting all the little projects and communities is remarkably easy.

Randy is right to pick up on it being an interesting occurrence. I dismissed it, as we are so used to seeing the cliques around Wikipedia, but it is noteworthy that a different community was able to have influence over what was basically an ownership issue.

The underlying point seems to be that it is a great demonstration that "consensus" on Wikipedia is a nonsense. Raul probably could claim to be working with the approval of the community because nobody knew or cared what was going on over there, and any decision making was done in a corner (with anyone caring to disagree being run off before they could gain traction).

While we all agree that Wikipedia is not a democracy, it does not have any workable system of crowd-sourcing decisions of governance. If crowd-sourcing worked, Raul would never have been allowed to gain his "job title" of FA Director. I would have thought that Raul would have been run off the project at the very point he held himself up to be the expert on FAs.

everyking · Unread post by **everyking** » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:32 pm

So let me see if I've got this straight. Raul got mad at the community because it wouldn't let him exercise absolute authority over FAC, so he quit editing in a fit of pique. He did not resign his cherished title, but he provided no notice of his departure on any page where a person might be expected to look, and he has not directed inquiries elsewhere. Two and a half months later, he is evidently still holding onto his anger and resentment towards the community, as he has not returned to editing. However, he is still listed as FA Director.

Why doesn't the community just replace him?

Unread post by **HRIP7** » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:53 pm

dogbiscuit wrote:The underlying point seems to be that it is a great demonstration that "consensus" on Wikipedia is a nonsense. Raul probably could claim to be working with the approval of the community because nobody knew or cared what was going on over there, and any decision making was done in a corner (with anyone caring to disagree being run off before they could gain traction).

Yep, that's pretty much how Wikipedia consensus tends to work.

Anroth · Unread post by **Anroth** » Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:15 pm

everyking wrote: Why doesn't the community just replace him?

Because they dont need to. It gets along just fine without him.

If you mean 'Why dont they make the position of FA Director redundant'.... I imagine no one cares enough to raise an RFC about it.

dogbiscuit · Unread post by **dogbiscuit** » Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:17 pm

everyking wrote:So let me see if I've got this straight. Raul got mad at the community because it wouldn't let him exercise absolute authority over FAC, so he quit editing in a fit of pique. He did not resign his cherished title, but he provided no notice of his departure on any page where a person might be expected to look, and he has not directed inquiries elsewhere. Two and a half months later, he is evidently still holding onto his anger and resentment towards the community, as he has not returned to editing. However, he is still listed as FA Director.

Why doesn't the community just replace him?

Yes, you've got it straight.

1) Why should a crowd-sourced decision-making system need anyone in charge in the first place? To designate an individual as a decision-maker is a recognition of the failure of the fundamental system of Wikipedia.

2) Therefore, why replace a job that is not needed. In crowd-sourcing there can be no power-vacuum.

3) The second-in-commands probably like the fact that they are effectively the committee in command without anyone to boss them around. They won't be lobbying for someone to come in and manage them; the vacuum protects them as they rule on the imagined wishes of the FA God-King.

The reality is that he has de-facto resigned, and in any sane organisation, dereliction of duty would be prima-face grouds for sacking. However, in Wikipedia, I predict:

a) The role will be deleted or re-assigned.
b) Raul will return in a fit of pique about having his status for life taken in vain.
c) Teh Community will note the many years of good service to the community and set aside the Wiki-Break.
d) The usurper will be banned after much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Anroth · Unread post by **Anroth** » Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:25 pm

In addition to the above, the absent boss is an amazing thing to have if you can get one. Dont have to report to anyone in practice, other dept's can be referred to the non-responding boss... Its great!

Willbeheard · Unread post by **Willbeheard** » Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:47 pm

This reminds me of a comedy spy thriller I read once. The head of the spy agency had died, but his secretary had the body preserved in some way and left it sitting propped up at the deak. His secretary was running the organisation, pretending that the boss was too busy to attend meetings.

FlossMore · Unread post by **FlossMore** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:15 am

Dogbiscuit got it about right--useful you know, dogbiscuits, getting beasts to sit and pose while you sketch out the facts.

I loved watching Raul though, the last couple of times at ANI or AN, or whichever AsswipeNutfest, were awesome, and I admire him for gaining such a large fiefdom; surely Raul was Lord of the Flies.

The self-anointed FADfL was one of the most amusing aspects of en.wiki. Oh, and anoint in the smearing grease sense, like when he tried to get that really lame climate change article of his promoted to FA.

Seriously, the hypocrisy surrounding the FADictatorForLife was the prime example of en.wiki hypocrisy; it's sad to see it go. Is it a sign for the future? I was editing and helping one of the prime plagiarizers with an article when the change happened. It was a while before people realized he was gone, but everyone realized all at once, and the jockeying for control was subtle, but very well done.

Wait, I change my mind; 8 years for a PhD? Why didn't the sycophants write it for him?

Mason · Unread post by **Mason** » Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:33 pm

Loyal Wikipediocracy reader Silver Seren started a discussion about this, which has drawn Raul back online from his break.

lilburne · Unread post by **lilburne** » Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:13 pm

Mason wrote:Loyal Wikipediocracy reader Silver Seren started a discussion about this, which has drawn Raul back online from his break.

Raul like Richard II of England is a consummate survivor.

dogbiscuit · Unread post by **dogbiscuit** » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:07 pm

So, any bets about who will be banned for forcing the sleeping giant to wake from his self-enforced 100 year slumber. You can't make this stuff up, but it is nice to have the evidence that the FA crowd have no confidence in crowd-sourcing as a solution.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:43 am

This is great. I can say one thing, if the general public saw our private wiki articles on Pellegrini, all raging hell would break loose.
He does NOT look like a "good Wikipedian", no matter how you try to define one. When he abuses a process, it stays abused.

Always remember: whenever you see the name "Raul654", think of this.

FlossMore · Unread post by **FlossMore** » Fri Nov 16, 2012 3:13 am

There are back-up dictators for life, though, and the sycophants are lined up behind them. (Not that there is any other place for a sycophant to line up.)

The community has been struggling, without their bosses, it seems. "It's not so much Raul himself as it is having someone officially being in charge so they can make the necessary decisions." SilverScreen, thanks for the fun.

I agree; it's not as if the community is capable of making the necessary decisions. Anyone may be able to edit, but decisions should be left for the competent 8-year PhDers.

everyking · Unread post by **everyking** » Thu Nov 22, 2012 1:54 am

I feel bad. I opened my big mouth and as a consequence Raul is now back to afflict Wikipedia again. I'm really sorry.

FlossMore · Unread post by **FlossMore** » Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:31 am

everyking wrote:I feel bad. I opened my big mouth and as a consequence Raul is now back to afflict Wikipedia again. I'm really sorry.

I find Raul entertaining. He's so wrong. And every time anyone on Wikipedia declares "anyone can edit," or "community," one has only to reply "Raul is Jimbo's friend." You did a good thing.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:53 pm

FlossMore wrote:I find Raul entertaining. He's so wrong. And every time anyone on Wikipedia declares "anyone can edit," or "community," one has only to reply "Raul is Jimbo's friend." You did a good thing.

Yes, he's helping to destroy it, so people who want to see Wikipedia go down in flames appreciate Mr. Pellegrini.

FlossMore · Unread post by **FlossMore** » Thu Nov 22, 2012 9:41 pm

EricBarbour wrote:
FlossMore wrote:I find Raul entertaining. He's so wrong. And every time anyone on Wikipedia declares "anyone can edit," or "community," one has only to reply "Raul is Jimbo's friend." You did a good thing.
Yes, he's helping to destroy it, so people who want to see Wikipedia go down in flames appreciate Mr. Pellegrini.

Indeed. And any teacher who has ever had to give an F for Wikipedia schlock no matter how many times they tell students not to use it, not to quote it, and not to plagiarize it, really wants the compilation of shit to go down in flames and stop showing up as the top search engine result in google searches. Especially where the second search engine result, after all the mirrors, is the source that the Wikipedia editor plagiarized from.

everyking · Unread post by **everyking** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:22 pm

The last episode in this long saga ended with Raul being provoked or pressured into returning to editing, after months of absence, and promising to resume his duties as FAC Director. He managed to sustain a low-to-moderate level of activity for a few weeks, but by the middle of January that had flickered out. Since January, his only activity has been to create one new article about a court case (perfectly respectable work, of course, but nothing to do with FAC) on 1 February. By 6 February, Prioryman was fed up:

"Hi Raul654, I'm afraid that it's become very obvious that for all practical intents you've effectively abandoned your role as Featured Article Director. I think it's time we found a solution that doesn't depend on one person who, in your case, has been virtually inactive since the New Year." Prioryman said that he would take the matter to the FAC talk page for discussion, and although a long discussion followed, it apparently went nowhere.

A terse response from Raul arrived five days later: "I'm discussing this with the delegates and I'll have a proper response in a few days."

Days passed, then weeks. On 16 March, David Levy expressed concern about Raul's health and well-being: "Mark: I sincerely hope that you're alive and well, as more than a month has elapsed since you promised "a proper response in a few days" (your most recent edit to the wiki, itself following a ten-day absence)."

On 24 March, PumpkinSky was perplexed enough, or annoyed enough, to write: "A "few days" has now become about 6 weeks, so where is this "proper response"? You haven't made any edits whatsoever."

If Raul doesn't want to do the job, he should resign. As it stands, he is clinging to the title without doing any work, and it's ridiculous.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:42 pm

everyking wrote:As it stands, he is clinging to the title without doing any work, and it's ridiculous.

Considering his extremely rotund physique, it's possible that he's clinging to life itself.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 4:48 pm

thekohser wrote:Considering his extremely rotund physique, it's possible that he's clinging to life itself.

Ooh, will Thekohser's Ultimate Online Encyclopedia have mandatory weight checking for its contributors? Fantastic. And you can hire Vigilant to be in charge of making sure that people's hair isn't too interesting.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 5:28 pm

Hex wrote:
thekohser wrote:Considering his extremely rotund physique, it's possible that he's clinging to life itself.
Ooh, will Thekohser's Ultimate Online Encyclopedia have mandatory weight checking for its contributors? Fantastic. And you can hire Vigilant to be in charge of making sure that people's hair isn't too interesting.

Nah, I just have it in for Mark in particular, because one time he said that I was either a fool or a liar, about something on which Pellegrini was mistaken factually. Even after I had a conversation with him on the phone to try to sort things out, that fat tub still refused to issue any apology for his having erroneously called me a fool or a liar.

Besides, it's April Fool's Day -- for all I know Mark Pellegrini has trimmed down to a nice, svelte 285 pounds. Then again, maybe he's not contributing so much content any more because his fingers grew too fat to touch individual letters on the keyboard.

Mark's original statement that offended my sensibilities:

"MyWikiBiz noted that he drew inspiration for his pay-me-to-edit-your-article buisness from Wikipedia:Bounty board and Wikipedia:Reward board. I'd like to point out that both of these articles state, very explicitly, that all donations are made to the Wikipedia Foundation, not the person doing the editing. Being paid to edit an article absolutely clear-cut conflict of interest, and if he says he didn't think it was, he's a fool or he's lying."

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 9:22 pm

everyking wrote: If Raul doesn't want to do the job, he should resign. As it stands, he is clinging to the title without doing any work, and it's ridiculous.

Thanks, I'll make note of this.

We've got so much dirt about Mark that I could probably write an entire book, just about him.....

(Judging from things like this, I have to think that Prioryman's only interest is to push Mark out of FA control, so he can take the job--and run more Gibraltar crap.)

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:13 am

EricBarbour wrote:
everyking wrote: If Raul doesn't want to do the job, he should resign. As it stands, he is clinging to the title without doing any work, and it's ridiculous.
Thanks, I'll make note of this.

We've got so much dirt about Mark that I could probably write an entire book, just about him.....

(Judging from things like this, I have to think that Prioryman's only interest is to push Mark out of FA control, so he can take the job--and run more Gibraltar crap.)

There are times where Prioryman seems aghast at the increasing chaos and wreckage as Wikipedia's pasted-together governance structure collapses in one area, sags in another. I wouldn't call any Wikipedian totally venal, not even those who wholeheartedly oppose this site's existence.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:41 am

Zoloft wrote:There are times where Prioryman seems aghast at the increasing chaos and wreckage as Wikipedia's pasted-together governance structure collapses in one area, sags in another. I wouldn't call any Wikipedian totally venal, not even those who wholeheartedly oppose this site's existence.

He should be more than "aghast". He's part of the problem.

greybeard · Unread post by **greybeard** » Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:45 am

Zoloft wrote:I wouldn't call any Wikipedian totally venal, not even those who wholeheartedly oppose this site's existence.

You have a generosity of spirit that speaks well of your character, but nonetheless seems naive. It may be true that there are Wikipidiots whose underlying intentions are at least partly high-minded and good, but they are rare among long-term members of the Wikipedia nomenklatura. As a counter-example, Jayjg (T-C-L) comes to mind.

As for Prioryman, I suspect his issues with us begin and end with the fact that we identify what he does as akin to trainspotting.

Jaranda · Unread post by **Jaranda** » Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:49 am

everyking wrote:The last episode in this long saga ended with Raul being provoked or pressured into returning to editing, after months of absence, and promising to resume his duties as FAC Director. He managed to sustain a low-to-moderate level of activity for a few weeks, but by the middle of January that had flickered out. Since January, his only activity has been to create one new article about a court case (perfectly respectable work, of course, but nothing to do with FAC) on 1 February. By 6 February, Prioryman was fed up:

"Hi Raul654, I'm afraid that it's become very obvious that for all practical intents you've effectively abandoned your role as Featured Article Director. I think it's time we found a solution that doesn't depend on one person who, in your case, has been virtually inactive since the New Year." Prioryman said that he would take the matter to the FAC talk page for discussion, and although a long discussion followed, it apparently went nowhere.

A terse response from Raul arrived five days later: "I'm discussing this with the delegates and I'll have a proper response in a few days."

Days passed, then weeks. On 16 March, David Levy expressed concern about Raul's health and well-being: "Mark: I sincerely hope that you're alive and well, as more than a month has elapsed since you promised "a proper response in a few days" (your most recent edit to the wiki, itself following a ten-day absence)."

On 24 March, PumpkinSky was perplexed enough, or annoyed enough, to write: "A "few days" has now become about 6 weeks, so where is this "proper response"? You haven't made any edits whatsoever."

If Raul doesn't want to do the job, he should resign. As it stands, he is clinging to the title without doing any work, and it's ridiculous.

The FA director job a useless position that is one of the last signs of the old Wikipedia "bureaucracy". The job isn't urgent that removing him from the position would decay the FAC process and cause total drama, in fact his inactivity makes it worse, as he would be out of touch with the community if he ever goes back to active editing. I don't think Raul had promoted a FA in years. A simple talk page "consensus" would work, and Raul would be powerless to react. But I'm baffled the community response to sit around and wait for a likely no time soon reply instead of taking action. The one editor I could think of that would have taken immediate action, SandyGeorgia is inactive.

Poetlister · Unread post by **Poetlister** » Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:53 pm

I can't understand why you are so keen for Raoul to return to the job. Does anyone think he's particularly good at it? So far as I can see, the place is running better now (not that that's saying very much).

Malleus · Unread post by **Malleus** » Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:04 pm

Outsider wrote:I can't understand why you are so keen for Raoul to return to the job. Does anyone think he's particularly good at it? So far as I can see, the place is running better now (not that that's saying very much).

The vacuum that's left though is there's now nobody to "promote" new FAC/FAR delegates, those who do the actual work. It would be horrifying if that process degenerated into yet another of WP's thinly disguised popularity contests.

Or perhaps good news for those who think the end of Wikipedia can't come soon enough.

Jaranda · Unread post by **Jaranda** » Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:43 pm

Malleus wrote:
Outsider wrote:I can't understand why you are so keen for Raoul to return to the job. Does anyone think he's particularly good at it? So far as I can see, the place is running better now (not that that's saying very much).
The vacuum that's left though is there's now nobody to "promote" new FAC/FAR delegates, those who do the actual work. It would be horrifying if that process degenerated into yet another of WP's thinly disguised popularity contests.

Or perhaps good news for those who think the end of Wikipedia can't come soon enough.

You do got a point, but Raul is AWOL and he wasn't a great director anyways. I know someone like SandyGeorgia could take over that task and bring back FAC to its former glory, but she's unfortunately AWOL as well. You have any names in mind?

everyking · Unread post by **everyking** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:09 am

Outsider wrote:I can't understand why you are so keen for Raoul to return to the job. Does anyone think he's particularly good at it? So far as I can see, the place is running better now (not that that's saying very much).

I just think he needs to step down if he's not going to do the work, or else the community should pick somebody to replace him (or, perhaps, come up with another arrangement altogether).

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:25 am

So this guy is so important to a Very Important Process that he can't do his Very Important Job for months at a stretch but still isn't replaced?

That is the point. It isn't important.

The only thing interesting is that many of them think its important, and yet are incapable of taking rational, obvious steps to address their problem.

Malleus · Unread post by **Malleus** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:35 am

Jaranda wrote:
Malleus wrote:
Outsider wrote:I can't understand why you are so keen for Raoul to return to the job. Does anyone think he's particularly good at it? So far as I can see, the place is running better now (not that that's saying very much).
The vacuum that's left though is there's now nobody to "promote" new FAC/FAR delegates, those who do the actual work. It would be horrifying if that process degenerated into yet another of WP's thinly disguised popularity contests.

Or perhaps good news for those who think the end of Wikipedia can't come soon enough.
You do got a point, but Raul is AWOL and he wasn't a great director anyways. I know someone like SandyGeorgia could take over that task and bring back FAC to its former glory, but she's unfortunately AWOL as well. You have any names in mind?

No, I don't, as I really couldn't care less (or as Americans love to say "I could care less", which is completely absurd). FA is just another of WP's feudal domains, I have no power to change that.

mac · Unread post by **mac** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:40 am

everyking wrote:
Outsider wrote:I can't understand why you are so keen for Raoul to return to the job. Does anyone think he's particularly good at it? So far as I can see, the place is running better now (not that that's saying very much).
I just think he needs to step down if he's not going to do the work, or else the community should pick somebody to replace him (or, perhaps, come up with another arrangement altogether).

There has been material on the front page every day that I have looked, so it seems the community already has come up with a suitable arrangement. Is there fear that the processes set up in his absence will be abolished if he returns? I'm not sure what the issue is. He left, the community carried on without him.

Malleus · Unread post by **Malleus** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:46 am

mac wrote:There has been material on the front page every day that I have looked, so it seems the community already has come up with a suitable arrangement. Is there fear that the processes set up in his absence will be abolished if he returns? I'm not sure what the issue is. He left, the community carried on without him.

The issue is that nobody but him has the authority to appoint those with the authority to decide what is or isn't an FA and which FAs should appear on the main page. It's only working now because enough of Raul's delegates are doing the work, but what happens when one or more of them disappear, as Raul himself has done?

Jaranda · Unread post by **Jaranda** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:55 am

mac wrote:
everyking wrote:
Outsider wrote:I can't understand why you are so keen for Raoul to return to the job. Does anyone think he's particularly good at it? So far as I can see, the place is running better now (not that that's saying very much).
I just think he needs to step down if he's not going to do the work, or else the community should pick somebody to replace him (or, perhaps, come up with another arrangement altogether).
There has been material on the front page every day that I have looked, so it seems the community already has come up with a suitable arrangement. Is there fear that the processes set up in his absence will be abolished if he returns? I'm not sure what the issue is. He left, the community carried on without him.

There is a suitable arrangement for that process for a while already, in fact that was the last FA related task he did if I remembered correctly. He stopped closed FACs since 2008ish letting SandyGeorgia and sometimes Karanacs call the shots there. I think I seen one close from him and that was because SandyGeorgia and Karanacs was both involved in the debate. Shame SandyGeorgia stepped down from her role because of drama by Jack and crew, with her it was the golden age of FAC, no matter how outspoken she was at times she knew how to evaluate content.

Jaranda · Unread post by **Jaranda** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:04 am

Malleus wrote:
mac wrote:There has been material on the front page every day that I have looked, so it seems the community already has come up with a suitable arrangement. Is there fear that the processes set up in his absence will be abolished if he returns? I'm not sure what the issue is. He left, the community carried on without him.
The issue is that nobody but him has the authority to appoint those with the authority to decide what is or isn't an FA and which FAs should appear on the main page. It's only working now because enough of Raul's delegates are doing the work, but what happens when one or more of them disappear, as Raul himself has done?

Well make the community get rid of Raul in absentia. The task is easy as there is no rule in Wikipedia that his role is for life, the question is which "clique" of editors would dominate the conversation and control the "consensus" to replace him. I think that role should be discussed only with editors who contributed to the FAC process and wrote a FA to avoid having the "wannabe admin" crowd and patrollers to stay away from a conversation they don't belong.

mac · Unread post by **mac** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:11 am

Malleus wrote:
mac wrote:There has been material on the front page every day that I have looked, so it seems the community already has come up with a suitable arrangement. Is there fear that the processes set up in his absence will be abolished if he returns? I'm not sure what the issue is. He left, the community carried on without him.
The issue is that nobody but him has the authority to appoint those with the authority to decide what is or isn't an FA and which FAs should appear on the main page. It's only working now because enough of Raul's delegates are doing the work, but what happens when one or more of them disappear, as Raul himself has done?

Apologies for not doing my homework. So many bytes here, not many of them useful. Perhaps Raul654 is there as a sock. Regardless, there is nothing to fear:

:I'm discussing this with the delegates and I'll have a proper response in a few days. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] ([[User talk:Raul654#top|talk]]) 03:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

So, there's that... I guess.

Malleus · Unread post by **Malleus** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:17 am

mac wrote:
Malleus wrote:
mac wrote:There has been material on the front page every day that I have looked, so it seems the community already has come up with a suitable arrangement. Is there fear that the processes set up in his absence will be abolished if he returns? I'm not sure what the issue is. He left, the community carried on without him.
The issue is that nobody but him has the authority to appoint those with the authority to decide what is or isn't an FA and which FAs should appear on the main page. It's only working now because enough of Raul's delegates are doing the work, but what happens when one or more of them disappear, as Raul himself has done?
Apologies for not doing my homework. So many bytes here, not many of them useful. Perhaps Raul654 is there as a sock. Regardless, there is nothing to fear:
:I'm discussing this with the delegates and I'll have a proper response in a few days. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] ([[User talk:Raul654#top|talk]]) 03:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
So, there's that... I guess.

The Wikipedia way is to fight fires once they've started, not to prevent fires from breaking out in the first place, as that would be a solution in search of a problem.

Mason · Unread post by **Mason** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:28 am

Malleus wrote:
mac wrote:There has been material on the front page every day that I have looked, so it seems the community already has come up with a suitable arrangement. Is there fear that the processes set up in his absence will be abolished if he returns? I'm not sure what the issue is. He left, the community carried on without him.
The issue is that nobody but him has the authority to appoint those with the authority to decide what is or isn't an FA and which FAs should appear on the main page. It's only working now because enough of Raul's delegates are doing the work, but what happens when one or more of them disappear, as Raul himself has done?

If the delegates stop doing the work, somebody else will step in and do it, "authority" or not. I suspect there are a handful of people just waiting for exactly that.

Raul should be commended (really) for setting up the featured article process in the first place (the effort to promote quality over quantity seems almost quaint now that the MMORPGers have taken over), but ain't nobody irreplaceable.

Malleus · Unread post by **Malleus** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 1:57 pm

Mason wrote:If the delegates stop doing the work, somebody else will step in and do it, "authority" or not. I suspect there are a handful of people just waiting for exactly that.

Raul should be commended (really) for setting up the featured article process in the first place (the effort to promote quality over quantity seems almost quaint now that the MMORPGers have taken over), but ain't nobody irreplaceable.

Without someone "in charge" FA will become a pointless cage wrestling match. And given the scale of the task to promote quality over quantity I don't see FA ever making a serious inroad into that as the process isn't scaleable. GA might, but has its own problems, although interestingly it has never had a leader. It may soon be time to reconsider merging FA and GA.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:03 pm

Malleus wrote: It may soon be time to reconsider merging FA and GA.

It's time to tear the whole damn thing down and purge all the "friends of Jimbo".

Malleus · Unread post by **Malleus** » Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:07 pm

EricBarbour wrote:
Malleus wrote: It may soon be time to reconsider merging FA and GA.
It's time to tear the whole damn thing down and purge all the "friends of Jimbo".

Well, there is that too.