Admin resignations

[Anthonyhcole]

Boing! said Zebedee

I finally no longer wish to be part of what is becoming an increasingly tainted category of users. ... The core problem is that the Wikipedia power structure is fundamentally flawed, and while neither WMF nor Arbcom will do anything about it (the latter repeatedly refuses to do anything about blatantly-unsuitable admins), we'll just keep on repeating the same fights over and over again - and I'm not prepared to do that any more.

Drmies

I'll have whatever Boing is having.

after both argued passionately against Fram's one month block of Eric Corbett, and Eric's request to have the block made indefinite.

[Tarc]

Eric's request to have the block made indefinite.

I'm sorry, but this is as much of the problem here as anything else, Malleus is such a drama-mongering cunt it's unbelievable. I don't think he should've been blocked either but for fuck's sake every time he is, he does this Scarlett O'Hara refusing-to-eat-her-vittles shtick, because now we have to feel sorry for poor, poor him when he says he's gonna quit.

And never does.

[Anthonyhcole]

I don't think he should've been blocked

I supported the block, for his treatment of relatively new editor Inglok on his talk page and his treatment of Timeshifter on a project page. We don't need that.

And yes, it's another in a long line of diva flounces on Eric's part. I'm sorry to see him go (if this one is for real) but I'd rather he goes than stays behaving like that.

[jd turk]

I supported the block, for his treatment of relatively new editor Inglok on his talk page and his treatment of Timeshifter on a project page. We don't need that.

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors. Sure, they pretend to value FA's and the like, but what they really need is people who buy in to the social aspects of the site to keep it going. Supposedly, Malleus is a very good writer (never cared enough to examine it, honestly). Is it worth it to keep him around to prop up some FAs, while he simultaneously drives away new editors who want to be in the club? Especially if there's a chance of getting a) work, and b) money from them?

It's a dysfunctional relationship on all sides, really. I don't understand why they keep him around, nor do I understand why he wants to do all this writing for free.

[Anthonyhcole]

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors.

Wikipedia does need good writers and tireless, generous contributors like Eric. It really is a shame to see him go. But, in my opinion, he can't stay while he treats others with such disrespect.

[Wer900]

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors.

Wikipedia does need good writers and tireless, generous contributors like Eric. It really is a shame to see him go. But, in my opinion, he can't stay while he treats others with such disrespect.

Perhaps the same social-networking crowd that decided to unnecessarily offend an entire religion with flimsy encyclopedic purpose, the same crowd that harangues good content contributors (Viriditas (T-C-L) being the latest whipping-post) on AN/I, and the same crowd that subverts the purpose of ArbCom for advantage over other users should learn a little about "respect".

[Anthonyhcole]

Perhaps the same social-networking crowd that decided to unnecessarily offend an entire religion with flimsy encyclopedic purpose, the same crowd that harangues good content contributors (Viriditas (T-C-L) being the latest whipping-post) on AN/I, and the same crowd that subverts the purpose of ArbCom for advantage over other users should learn a little about "respect".

Of course.

[Zoloft]

The main reason people like Eric are needed on Wikipedia is that he brings articles up to a finished, quality level. Without the few editors like him, Wikipedia's high-profile articles never reach that level.

[jd turk]

The main reason people like Eric are needed on Wikipedia is that he brings articles up to a finished, quality level. Without the few editors like him, Wikipedia's high-profile articles never reach that level.

Sure. But again, who cares? When people go to WP they're looking for an article on something. All most people care about is that the article they want at that moment is adequate. It would be nice if the articles are all FA quality, and free of bias, and factually correct, and a lot of other things that quite honestly make me giggle to type. But in the end, there's a lot more chaos than there is high quality writing, and that's the way the system is set up.

I just don't see why people who can write and are "tireless, generous contributors" do it, especially once they've seen how little respect WP actually has for them.

[Vigilant]

The main reason people like Eric are needed on Wikipedia is that he brings articles up to a finished, quality level. Without the few editors like him, Wikipedia's high-profile articles never reach that level.

Sure. But again, who cares? When people go to WP they're looking for an article on something. All most people care about is that the article they want at that moment is adequate. It would be nice if the articles are all FA quality, and free of bias, and factually correct, and a lot of other things that quite honestly make me giggle to type. But in the end, there's a lot more chaos than there is high quality writing, and that's the way the system is set up.

I just don't see why people who can write and are "tireless, generous contributors" do it, especially once they've seen how little respect WP actually has for them.

Readers don't give a flying fuck about FA/GA status.
It's internal wiki-masturbation and counting coup.

[Randy from Boise]

Boing! said Zebedee

I finally no longer wish to be part of what is becoming an increasingly tainted category of users. ... The core problem is that the Wikipedia power structure is fundamentally flawed, and while neither WMF nor Arbcom will do anything about it (the latter repeatedly refuses to do anything about blatantly-unsuitable admins), we'll just keep on repeating the same fights over and over again - and I'm not prepared to do that any more.

Drmies

I'll have whatever Boing is having.

after both argued passionately against Fram's one month block of Eric Corbett, and Eric's request to have the block made indefinite.

Power to both of them!

RfB

[Malleus]

I just don't see why people who can write and are "tireless, generous contributors" do it, especially once they've seen how little respect WP actually has for them.

Neither can I.

[Randy from Boise]

Readers don't give a flying fuck about FA/GA status.
It's internal wiki-masturbation and counting coup.

+1

RfB

[jd turk]

I just don't see why people who can write and are "tireless, generous contributors" do it, especially once they've seen how little respect WP actually has for them.

Neither can I.

Glad to have you on board, Malleus.

[Midsize Jake]

I just don't see why people who can write and are "tireless, generous contributors" do it, especially once they've seen how little respect WP actually has for them.

Neither can I.

It's good practice if you're between jobs in the PR industry...?

[jd turk]

Readers don't give a flying fuck about FA/GA status.
It's internal wiki-masturbation and counting coup.

Exactly.

"I've written twenty Featured Articles for one of the top websites in the world!"

"Really? Cool. Now can I have my fries, please?"

[Hex]

Readers don't give a flying fuck about FA/GA status.
It's internal wiki-masturbation and counting coup.

I'm pretty sure that the massive majority of readers have no interest in Wikipedia at all beyond quickly getting the information they want from articles.

[tarantino]

I think anyone who chooses to be called Boing! said Zebedee should be disqualified from holding any positions of power. Likewise for Fluffernutter, Beeblebrox, etc.

[Zoloft]

Split head-conking to here: link

[The Devil's Advocate]

Bishonen (T-C-L) is talking about getting in on the exodus as well.

[Wer900]

Readers don't give a flying fuck about FA/GA status.
It's internal wiki-masturbation and counting coup.

I'm pretty sure that the massive majority of readers have no interest in Wikipedia at all beyond quickly getting the information they want from articles.

It's good if he information is accurate and well-presented, right? Many articles except GAs and FAs are hacked together and do not give proper context. Word hodgepodges do not a useful reference work make.

[HRIP7]

I supported the block, for his treatment of relatively new editor Inglok on his talk page and his treatment of Timeshifter on a project page. We don't need that.

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors. Sure, they pretend to value FA's and the like, but what they really need is people who buy in to the social aspects of the site to keep it going. Supposedly, Malleus is a very good writer (never cared enough to examine it, honestly). Is it worth it to keep him around to prop up some FAs, while he simultaneously drives away new editors who want to be in the club? Especially if there's a chance of getting a) work, and b) money from them?

It's a dysfunctional relationship on all sides, really. I don't understand why they keep him around, nor do I understand why he wants to do all this writing for free.

You may say Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, only contributors. But it's also a question of what level of competence you want to set as a minimum standard for participation, and what sort of average capability you want to strive for on something purporting to be an encyclopedia project.

Inglok can't write idiomatic English. Malleus can. So now Wikipedia is left with Inglok, and Malleus is gone. Not exactly a win, is it? Judging by that edit Malleus reverted, Inglok shouldn't go round doing copyediting. He lacks the skill to do it, and just ends up degrading things that were fine before. If Inglok wants to get into a pissing contest about something like that with someone who can write, he is a net negative.

A good proportion of the cases where Malleus was rude to someone were much like that. Wikipedia doesn't select for ability, but for civility, because ability is harder to recognise for those who don't have it. So they end up with a lot of superficially polite people who can't write, and whose reading and research skills are probably not too brilliant either.

[DanMurphy]

I supported the block, for his treatment of relatively new editor Inglok on his talk page and his treatment of Timeshifter on a project page. We don't need that.

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors. Sure, they pretend to value FA's and the like, but what they really need is people who buy in to the social aspects of the site to keep it going. Supposedly, Malleus is a very good writer (never cared enough to examine it, honestly). Is it worth it to keep him around to prop up some FAs, while he simultaneously drives away new editors who want to be in the club? Especially if there's a chance of getting a) work, and b) money from them?

It's a dysfunctional relationship on all sides, really. I don't understand why they keep him around, nor do I understand why he wants to do all this writing for free.

You may say Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, only contributors. But it's also a question of what level of competence you want to set as a minimum standard for participation, and what sort of average capability you want to strive for on something purporting to be an encyclopedia project.

Inglok can't write idiomatic English. Malleus can. So now Wikipedia is left with Inglok, and Malleus is gone. Not exactly a win, is it? Judging by that edit Malleus reverted, Inglok shouldn't go round doing copyediting. He lacks the skill to do it, and just ends up degrading things that were fine before. If Inglok wants to get into a pissing contest about something like that with someone who can write, he is a net negative.

A good proportion of the cases where Malleus was rude to someone were much like that. Wikipedia doesn't select for ability, but for civility, because ability is harder to recognise for those who don't have it. So they end up with a lot of superficially polite people who can't write, and whose reading and research skills are probably not too brilliant either.

Yes. All that and Dunning-Kruger too.

[jd turk]

You may say Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, only contributors. But it's also a question of what level of competence you want to set as a minimum standard for participation, and what sort of average capability you want to strive for on something purporting to be an encyclopedia project.

Inglok can't write idiomatic English. Malleus can. So now Wikipedia is left with Inglok, and Malleus is gone. Not exactly a win, is it? Judging by that edit Malleus reverted, Inglok shouldn't go round doing copyediting. He lacks the skill to do it, and just ends up degrading things that were fine before. If Inglok wants to get into a pissing contest about something like that with someone who can write, he is a net negative.

A good proportion of the cases where Malleus was rude to someone were much like that. Wikipedia doesn't select for ability, but for civility, because ability is harder to recognise for those who don't have it. So they end up with a lot of superficially polite people who can't write, and whose reading and research skills are probably not too brilliant either.

Inglok's not a good case here because he obviously shouldn't be writing copy, but there are still plenty of other things WP could be using him for (including possibly soaking up donations). You can try and work him somewhere else where he can be of use, or you can call him an asshole and try and run him off yourself.

For the most part, people who can't write don't know they can't write. I'd have to think there's a better way to encourage a volunteer to be productive than by calling him an asshole.

For example, YouReallyCan was an atrocious writer, but he had lots of friends and defenders because he worked in an area where no one else wanted to.

[Malleus]

I supported the block, for his treatment of relatively new editor Inglok on his talk page and his treatment of Timeshifter on a project page. We don't need that.

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors. Sure, they pretend to value FA's and the like, but what they really need is people who buy in to the social aspects of the site to keep it going. Supposedly, Malleus is a very good writer (never cared enough to examine it, honestly). Is it worth it to keep him around to prop up some FAs, while he simultaneously drives away new editors who want to be in the club? Especially if there's a chance of getting a) work, and b) money from them?

It's a dysfunctional relationship on all sides, really. I don't understand why they keep him around, nor do I understand why he wants to do all this writing for free.

You may say Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, only contributors. But it's also a question of what level of competence you want to set as a minimum standard for participation, and what sort of average capability you want to strive for on something purporting to be an encyclopedia project.

Inglok can't write idiomatic English. Malleus can. So now Wikipedia is left with Inglok, and Malleus is gone. Not exactly a win, is it? Judging by that edit Malleus reverted, Inglok shouldn't go round doing copyediting. He lacks the skill to do it, and just ends up degrading things that were fine before. If Inglok wants to get into a pissing contest about something like that with someone who can write, he is a net negative.

A good proportion of the cases where Malleus was rude to someone were much like that. Wikipedia doesn't select for ability, but for civility, because ability is harder to recognise for those who don't have it. So they end up with a lot of superficially polite people who can't write, and whose reading and research skills are probably not too brilliant either.

.
I think Wikipedia has to be left to the children now. A pity, because I once did really believe in the idea.

[jd turk]

I think Wikipdia has to be left to the childen now. A pity, because I once did really believe in the idea.

The "idea" is that you take your skills and donate them for free to a system that profits from you and refuses to even acknowledge your gifts. That way people who don't have a tenth of your ability or knowledge can point to what you created and say, "I did that."

[Zoloft]

Yes. All that and Dunning-Kruger too.

A sort of Gresham's Law (T-H-L) applies.

[Malleus]

I think Wikipdia has to be left to the childen now. A pity, because I once did really believe in the idea.

The "idea" is that you take your skills and donate them for free to a system that profits from you and refuses to even acknowledge your gifts. That way people who don't have a tenth of your ability or knowledge can point to what you created and say, "I did that."

I'm not in the mood to argue with that, but there was a time when i thought there was nobler purpose behind all the hard work. Obviously I was wrong.

[jd turk]

I think Wikipdia has to be left to the childen now. A pity, because I once did really believe in the idea.

The "idea" is that you take your skills and donate them for free to a system that profits from you and refuses to even acknowledge your gifts. That way people who don't have a tenth of your ability or knowledge can point to what you created and say, "I did that."

I'm not in the mood to argue with that, but there was a time when i thought there was nobler purpose behind all the hard work. Obviously I was wrong.

No sin in it. I'm pretty sure most of the people who are on this board felt that way at one time (not counting the ones who made cash at it, who were the smart ones). You live, you learn, you realize you're wasting time and you move on. Such is life.

[Vigilant]

Bishonen (T-C-L) is talking about getting in on the exodus as well.

Good.
I hope she get's hit by a bus.

[Zoloft]

Bishonen (T-C-L) is talking about getting in on the exodus as well.

Good.
I hope she get's hit by a bus.

Watch your apostrophes now. Oh, and the *waves* faux bodily harm thing too.

[Vigilant]

Bishonen (T-C-L) is talking about getting in on the exodus as well.

Good.
I hope she get's hit by a bus.

Watch your apostrophes now. Oh, and the *waves* faux bodily harm thing too.

Damn.
Foiled by the grammar Nazis.

I'm really, really tired from five hours of dirty construction work for a worthy cause.

Now, if I'd said, "I hope I get to run her over with my bus!", I'd be a shoe-in for a WMF contract.

[Volunteer Marek]

I supported the block, for his treatment of relatively new editor Inglok on his talk page and his treatment of Timeshifter on a project page. We don't need that.

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors. Sure, they pretend to value FA's and the like, but what they really need is people who buy in to the social aspects of the site to keep it going. Supposedly, Malleus is a very good writer (never cared enough to examine it, honestly). Is it worth it to keep him around to prop up some FAs, while he simultaneously drives away new editors who want to be in the club? Especially if there's a chance of getting a) work, and b) money from them?

It's a dysfunctional relationship on all sides, really. I don't understand why they keep him around, nor do I understand why he wants to do all this writing for free.

You may say Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, only contributors. But it's also a question of what level of competence you want to set as a minimum standard for participation, and what sort of average capability you want to strive for on something purporting to be an encyclopedia project.

Inglok can't write idiomatic English. Malleus can. So now Wikipedia is left with Inglok, and Malleus is gone. Not exactly a win, is it? Judging by that edit Malleus reverted, Inglok shouldn't go round doing copyediting. He lacks the skill to do it, and just ends up degrading things that were fine before. If Inglok wants to get into a pissing contest about something like that with someone who can write, he is a net negative.

A good proportion of the cases where Malleus was rude to someone were much like that. Wikipedia doesn't select for ability, but for civility, because ability is harder to recognise for those who don't have it. So they end up with a lot of superficially polite people who can't write, and whose reading and research skills are probably not too brilliant either.

Mmmm. I wouldn't say that Inglot "can't write idiomatic English", or that the copy edits are particularly bad. Most of them appear to be just fine and at least some are quite legit (example http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =560583368). The "the" thing in that edit might be just American vs. British usage (Americans tend to over use it). The corrections weren't wrong, though I guess they can upset someone's particular sense of aesthetics.

[Anthonyhcole]

Inglok can't write idiomatic English. Malleus can. So now Wikipedia is left with Inglok, and Malleus is gone. Not exactly a win, is it?

Inglok's "the" was redundant. And it must be immensely frustrating when someone demands you explain why the "the" is wrong. Still, there's no call for that kind of abuse, Eric.

A good proportion of the cases where Malleus was rude to someone were much like that.

True. That's been the problem all along. His abuse is mostly directed at irritating well-meaning idiots or truly toxic people, and it's very hard to condemn him for it. If he limited it to the truly toxic and those who know him and can give it back (and kept it off article and project space - where people are trying to work) I wouldn't care.

[Hex]

How telling that the moment that some admins choose to throw their toys out of the pram is when it appears that some real action is finally going to be taken against one of the worst nuisances on the project. Where have all these fine words and stands taken on principle been until now? Could it be that the members of their special buddy club matter more to them than Joe/Jane Average Editor, perhaps?

Bishonen (T-C-L) is talking about getting in on the exodus as well.

[Malleus]

How telling that the moment that some admins choose to throw their toys out of the pram is when it appears that some real action is finally going to be taken against one of the worst nuisances on the project. Where have all these fine words and stands taken on principle been until now? Could it be that the members of their special buddy club matter more to them than Joe/Jane Average Editor, perhaps?

Bishonen (T-C-L) is talking about getting in on the exodus as well.

Assuming that you're talking about me, what action is about to be taken? Do you simply not understand the way that verb tenses work, or are you privy to some scheme being hatched up in one of your disgusting IRC channels?

[Poetlister]

I'm sorry, but this is as much of the problem here as anything else, Malleus is such a drama-mongering cunt it's unbelievable.

The heat is getting to people and making them grumpy. This place needs better air-conditioning!

[Midsize Jake]

Assuming that you're talking about me, what action is about to be taken?

Maybe he's referring to the "Visual Editor," and the "nuisance" is just the fact that people have been forced to learn WikiML until now...? Mr. Martin hasn't shown too many serious problems with verb tense in the past.

Mr. Past, Mr. Present, and Mr. Future were sitting together in a bar, having a drink. Soon, however, they got into an argument, though they couldn't agree on the subject. In the end there was no violence, but there was definitely a lot of tense.

[SB_Johnny]

How telling that the moment that some admins choose to throw their toys out of the pram is when it appears that some real action is finally going to be taken against one of the worst nuisances on the project. Where have all these fine words and stands taken on principle been until now? Could it be that the members of their special buddy club matter more to them than Joe/Jane Average Editor, perhaps?

Assuming that you're talking about me, what action is about to be taken? Do you simply not understand the way that verb tenses work, or are you privy to some scheme being hatched up in one of your disgusting IRC channels?

If he is talking about you, I'm going to have to re-evaluate my opinion of him. I did that in regards to you a week or so ago, and now feel free to hold you in low esteem.

[Malleus]

How telling that the moment that some admins choose to throw their toys out of the pram is when it appears that some real action is finally going to be taken against one of the worst nuisances on the project. Where have all these fine words and stands taken on principle been until now? Could it be that the members of their special buddy club matter more to them than Joe/Jane Average Editor, perhaps?

Assuming that you're talking about me, what action is about to be taken? Do you simply not understand the way that verb tenses work, or are you privy to some scheme being hatched up in one of your disgusting IRC channels?

If he is talking about you, I'm going to have to re-evaluate my opinion of him. I did that in regards to you a week or so ago, and now feel free to hold you in low esteem.

That you might even consider that I give a rat's arse about the esteem you hold me in, or that I hold you in, is rather a surprise. And for the sake of those who are slow of understanding "low" doesn't even get close.

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

I think Wikipedia has to be left to the children now. A pity, because I once did really believe in the idea.

Wikipedia needs to require children to have parental consent before they can edit, which seems to be required by U.S. law (see my comment on the ArbCom case for links). This would reduce exploitation and risk.

A side effect would be reducing the "editors" in half without removing any writers.

[TungstenCarbide]

I think Wikipedia has to be left to the children now. A pity, because I once did really believe in the idea.

It is a good idea, mostly. Some of the problems that need fixing are; toxic culture, no merit based leadership, no quality or release system, Google juice short circuiting potential competition that would otherwise help the concept evolve and improve. A lot of the problems we discuss here in detail are a consequence of these.

[EricBarbour]

How charming, that Mr. Cole is bringing up his pathetically failed attempt to desysop Hex, back in January,
and using it as an "example" to justify dumping "problem admins" on Arbcom.

In the past, Arbcom has shown a repeated, determined unwillingness and inability to deal with "problem admins".
Asking them to "take command" again is not merely fruitless, it is outright idiocy.

[Malleus]

How charming, that Mr. Cole is bringing up his pathetically failed attempt to desysop Hex, back in January,
and using it as an "example" to justify dumping "problem admins" on Arbcom.

In the past, Arbcom has shown a repeated, determined unwillingness and inability to deal with "problem admins".
Asking them to "take command" again is not merely fruitless, it is outright idiocy.

It is indeed.

[HRIP7]

Mmmm. I wouldn't say that Inglot "can't write idiomatic English", or that the copy edits are particularly bad. Most of them appear to be just fine and at least some are quite legit (example http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =560583368).

Fair enough. Having now clicked through a dozen other copy edits by Inglok (and done my bit to keep Wikipedia at no. 7 on Alexa ... 7? When did it drop?), I didn't see any more that were problematic.

[Hex]

Talking of Bishonen (T-C-L),

- Bishzilla (T-C-L)
- Bishapod (T-C-L)
- Darwinfish (T-C-L)
- Darwinbish (T-C-L)
- Little Stupid (T-C-L)
- Cassandra at the peak of her insanity (T-C-L)

This is one of the people entrusted to "administer" the people who can alter the first page of Google results for any topic (commonly referred to as "Wikipedians"). Aren't we lucky.

[Smiley]

I know he's not an admin, but did anyone notice Volunteer Marek's quiet exit?

Contaminated

It's dying anyway.

[eppur si muove]

I know he's not an admin, but did anyone notice Volunteer Marek's quiet exit?

Contaminated

It's dying anyway.

Hm. We need to give it some time before taking this as an exit. He's left here at least once and reappeared.

[Casliber]

Wikipedia doesn't need good writers, it just needs contributors.

Wikipedia does need good writers and tireless, generous contributors like Eric. It really is a shame to see him go. But, in my opinion, he can't stay while he treats others with such disrespect.

Anthony, have you scrolled up through Eric's talk page and looked through the history? Before the last kerfuffle there are loads of constructive article-related discussion, help with writing and copyediting articles all over the place. Does this look like a net negative? Really?

[Casliber]

Readers don't give a flying fuck about FA/GA status.
It's internal wiki-masturbation and counting coup.

I'm pretty sure that the massive majority of readers have no interest in Wikipedia at all beyond quickly getting the information they want from articles.

Succinct, clear writing can be a joy to read (and a great way to make knowledge interesting), and anyone who facilitates this is highly worthwhile. The world's media is full of enough turgid drivel as it is, some of which seems to have the goal of driving off rather than engaging the reader......