Wikipediocracy

Vigilant wrote:

Hex wrote:As it turns out, the title of this thread has now been proven wrong. The next debacle is Media Viewer.

Now, now.

It's still a horse race of awfulness.

Wikimedia Foundation
Error

Our servers are currently experiencing a technical problem. This is probably temporary and should be fixed soon. Please try again in a few minutes.

You may be able to get further information in the #wikipedia channel on the Freenode IRC network.

The Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit organisation which hosts some of the most popular sites on the Internet, including Wikipedia. It has a constant need to purchase new hardware. If you would like to help, please donate.
If you report this error to the Wikimedia System Administrators, please include the details below.
PHP fatal error in /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.24wmf12/extensions/Flow/includes/Content/Content.php line 37:
Argument 2 passed to Flow\Content\Content::onFetchContentObject() must implement interface Content, null given

Hex wrote:That is crisp.

Holy shit, it's even simpler to reproduce:

OK: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=612436171
Bad: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=612436172
OK: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=612436173

What has it got to do with Flow, though? In the sense of why is that particular revision ID associated with Flow?

Mason wrote:

Hex wrote: What has it got to do with Flow, though? In the sense of why is that particular revision ID associated with Flow?

The software is choking on an oversighted/supressed revision. It should just say "you're not allowed to see this" but somebody musta broke it.

Hex wrote:

Mason wrote:

Hex wrote: What has it got to do with Flow, though? In the sense of why is that particular revision ID associated with Flow?

The software is choking on an oversighted/supressed revision. It should just say "you're not allowed to see this" but somebody musta broke it.

Right.

That's WTF enough on its own, but I swear, the WMF's developers have no idea how to interface these new components with the suppression system. Look at this bug that I filed for the notification system ("Echo"). The components are clearly only integrated at the shallowest of levels.

Zoloft wrote:

Hex wrote:

Mason wrote:

Hex wrote: What has it got to do with Flow, though? In the sense of why is that particular revision ID associated with Flow?

The software is choking on an oversighted/supressed revision. It should just say "you're not allowed to see this" but somebody musta broke it.

Right.

That's WTF enough on its own, but I swear, the WMF's developers have no idea how to interface these new components with the suppression system. Look at this bug that I filed for the notification system ("Echo"). The components are clearly only integrated at the shallowest of levels.

It looks like the developers have successfully 'surfaced' the user interface. I think that was on a PowerPoint slide somewhere.

Mason wrote:

Hex wrote:That is crisp.

Holy shit, it's even simpler to reproduce:

OK: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=612436171
Bad: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=612436172
OK: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=612436173

What has it got to do with Flow, though? In the sense of why is that particular revision ID associated with Flow?

The software is choking on an oversighted/supressed revision. It should just say "you're not allowed to see this" but somebody musta broke it.

Hex wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Hex wrote:As it turns out, the title of this thread has now been proven wrong. The next debacle is Media Viewer.

Now, now.

It's still a horse race of awfulness.

Oh, sure, but what I mean is that literally the next big stink is going to be in three days' time.

Hex wrote:

Hex wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Hex wrote:As it turns out, the title of this thread has now been proven wrong. The next debacle is Media Viewer.

Now, now.

It's still a horse race of awfulness.

Oh, sure, but what I mean is that literally the next big stink is going to be in three days' time.

It wasn't exactly a Sherlock Holmes grade of intelligence-required deduction, but still... totally called it.

Vigilant wrote:

Hex wrote:

Hex wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Hex wrote:As it turns out, the title of this thread has now been proven wrong. The next debacle is Media Viewer.

Now, now.

It's still a horse race of awfulness.

Oh, sure, but what I mean is that literally the next big stink is going to be in three days' time.

It wasn't exactly a Sherlock Holmes grade of intelligence-required deduction, but still... totally called it.

Strangely, it's the thoughtless thuggery at the hands of the WMF that is drawing the most ire from the faithful.

Nothing like dropping something in the donation plate at church and then getting curbstomped by the alter boys right outside the doors.

Randy from Boise wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Hex wrote:

Hex wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Hex wrote:As it turns out, the title of this thread has now been proven wrong. The next debacle is Media Viewer.

Now, now.

It's still a horse race of awfulness.

Oh, sure, but what I mean is that literally the next big stink is going to be in three days' time.

It wasn't exactly a Sherlock Holmes grade of intelligence-required deduction, but still... totally called it.

Strangely, it's the thoughtless thuggery at the hands of the WMF that is drawing the most ire from the faithful.

Nothing like dropping something in the donation plate at church and then getting curbstomped by the alter boys right outside the doors.

Media Viewer isn't bad and is probably superior for about 80% of actual users (as opposed to editors).

Moeller has abused tools, however. That's what ArbCom needs to address.

RfB

Randy from Boise wrote: Media Viewer isn't bad and is probably superior for about 80% of actual users (as opposed to editors).

Moeller has abused tools, however. That's what ArbCom needs to address.

RfB

Zoloft wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:
Media Viewer isn't bad and is probably superior for about 80% of actual users (as opposed to editors).

Moeller has abused tools, however. That's what ArbCom needs to address.

RfB

Erik Möller, the current Deputy Director of the Wikimedia Foundation, abused his position.

Randy from Boise wrote:No, there is nothing ArbCom can do about that.

Randy from Boise wrote: No, there is nothing ArbCom can do about that. He abused tools, by reverting a righteous RFC-backed tweak and threatening consequences, while ENORMOUSLY involved professionally and financially...

Kelly Martin wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:No, there is nothing ArbCom can do about that.

Sure, they can. They can formally protest Moeller's conduct.

Wikipedians need to get it through their heads that neither they nor Wikipedia itself is the property of the WMF to play with as it pleases.

Randy from Boise wrote:

Kelly Martin wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:No, there is nothing ArbCom can do about that.

Sure, they can. They can formally protest Moeller's conduct.

Wikipedians need to get it through their heads that neither they nor Wikipedia itself is the property of the WMF to play with as it pleases.

Well, I will yield the first point. They should do that. And I think my idea of an RFC of En-WP, limited to the question of a vote of confidence in Erik Moeller as head of software gunk, might have some effect — particularly if emulated by other language WPs.

As for your second point — on that your opinion is based in hope rather than legality. One thing is pretty clear: the entire policy & guidelines community apparatus upon Wikipedia is a chimera. Ultimate power belongs to the owners, which is WMF. This is not to say that there isn't possibility for organization and use of the media against the 800 pound $50M WMF gorilla in San Francisco. But do recognize that burly primate for what it is.

RfB

Vigilant wrote:If the WMF is willing to intervene in a trivial dispute over the default state of a beta level software tool in the common.js file, where won't they throw down their hammer?

Is there ANY point in doing ANY governance work on en.wp?

Will it fall to commons to save local control for the users?

Poetlister wrote:

Vigilant wrote:If the WMF is willing to intervene in a trivial dispute over the default state of a beta level software tool in the common.js file, where won't they throw down their hammer?

Is there ANY point in doing ANY governance work on en.wp?

Will it fall to commons to save local control for the users?

Such interventions are extremely rare. Wait till we have several before we say things like that. And no doubt Erik could as easily intervene on Commons if they did something to annoy him.

Hex wrote:Thought I'd share something I just happened across: Wikipedia:Flow/Community engagement (T-H-L). I like that Fram sarcastically tagged it as "historic" months ago and nobody in the WMF developer section even noticed.

Hex wrote:Thought I'd share something I just happened across: Wikipedia:Flow/Community engagement (T-H-L). I like that Fram sarcastically tagged it as "historic" months ago and nobody in the WMF developer section even noticed.

Hex wrote:That's where the "flow" comes from - Brandon Harris' grand plan for improving workflow.

Kelly Martin wrote:

Hex wrote:That's where the "flow" comes from - Brandon Harris' grand plan for improving workflow.

I so want to see this get developed, just because I'm absolutely certain that Brandon has NO CLUE what a workflow system looks like.

I also don't understand how workflow is in any way related to threaded discussions, there really does not seem to me for there to need to be much integration between a workflow system and a messaging system. Some, yes, sure, but that should be doable with a fairly simple API.

Edit: Reading the MediaWiki page, it seems that he thinks that workflows inherently involve talk pages because on Wikipedia, the community workarounds for the lack of a PROPER workflow system include the use of talk pages. Oh, the pain, it hurts.

I hate to say it, but as idiotic as Six Sigma is, these guys would still benefit from being forced to do 6Sig training just because it would forcibly introduce them to the concept of business process analysis, input and output metrics, decision points, and a whole load of related concepts that they clearly do not understand.

DannyH (WMF), what's so difficult about indenting to more than three levels? That's really, really, really basic functionality others have solved long ago. Look at Reddit. My advice would be don't even think about bringing anything to the community until you have replicated that functionality. You'll be a laughing stock or worse, and rightly so. Andreas JN466 00:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Jayen466: Infinite indentation simply does not work in a mobile context. In order for Flow to be successful (e.g., "meet its design goals"), it needs to work for the future, and not only for the past. --Jorm (WMF) (talk) 00:47, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

So Flow is designed for mobile use? Do you expect people to do encyclopedic work while standing in the subway with their mobile phone? Fair enough, occasionally one might want to fire off a talk page reply in such a situation, but then I think it would be rather better to cater for that situation by having mobiles display the talk page indents differently, perhaps with micro indents. Does anyone know what Reddit threads look like on a mobile? Andreas JN466 01:46, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Having borrowed a mobile, I find that Reddit looks much the same there as it does on a desktop computer. And it's perfectly usable, infinite indentation and all. (By the way, one thing I really like about Reddit is that when two people go on and on replying to each other ad infinitum, eventually, after 10 indents or so, Reddit will just put an arrow link to a new subpage.) I honestly don't see the problem. Andreas JN466 02:05, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

SB_Johnny wrote:Looks like it's game on again.

Fram wrote:== Get lost, WMF ==

SB_Johnny wrote:Looks like it's game on again.

Error

Insufficient permission to access the content.

Return to Main Page.

[d2cb03e7] 2014-09-05 09:36:30: Fatal exception of type Flow\Exception\PermissionException

Fram wrote:== So funny it hurts ==

So, after fully protecting [[Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Flow test]], I switched to my non-admin alter ego [[User:EngFram]] t osee whether protection actually works with Flow. Well, not really.

The good news: you can't create a new topic anymore.

The bad news:
*if you try to create a new topic, you first can edit as much as you like, but on saving, you get a smallish pink box with the message "Blocked". Blocked? Oh, I'm not really blocked, I just can't save my new topic.
*If you want to reply to existing topics, no problem! You can reply to topics on fully protected pages. Which means that protecting a Flow-enabled page has very little effect and won't do a lot to stop vandals and the like. Yes, this is completely ready to be rolled out to more pages. Fram (talk) 08:17, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Mason wrote:

Fram wrote:== So funny it hurts ==

So, after fully protecting [[Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Flow test]], I switched to my non-admin alter ego [[User:EngFram]] t osee whether protection actually works with Flow. Well, not really.

The good news: you can't create a new topic anymore.

The bad news:
*if you try to create a new topic, you first can edit as much as you like, but on saving, you get a smallish pink box with the message "Blocked". Blocked? Oh, I'm not really blocked, I just can't save my new topic.
*If you want to reply to existing topics, no problem! You can reply to topics on fully protected pages. Which means that protecting a Flow-enabled page has very little effect and won't do a lot to stop vandals and the like. Yes, this is completely ready to be rolled out to more pages. Fram (talk) 08:17, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Good lord, people, what's so hard about "get it working first, then give the public a crack at it"?

Mason wrote:

Fram wrote:== So funny it hurts ==

So, after fully protecting [[Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Flow test]], I switched to my non-admin alter ego [[User:EngFram]] t osee whether protection actually works with Flow. Well, not really.

The good news: you can't create a new topic anymore.

The bad news:
*if you try to create a new topic, you first can edit as much as you like, but on saving, you get a smallish pink box with the message "Blocked". Blocked? Oh, I'm not really blocked, I just can't save my new topic.
*If you want to reply to existing topics, no problem! You can reply to topics on fully protected pages. Which means that protecting a Flow-enabled page has very little effect and won't do a lot to stop vandals and the like. Yes, this is completely ready to be rolled out to more pages. Fram (talk) 08:17, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Good lord, people, what's so hard about "get it working first, then give the public a crack at it"?

Konveyor Belt wrote:The Flow software and most of Wikimedia is designed from the top down. What I mean by this is that they worry so much about levels of indenting and how to make sure conversations are structured that they forget to install basic features like deleting and editing posts.

Mason wrote: Good lord, people, what's so hard about "get it working first, then give the public a crack at it"?

• Realise this is panic-driven (something has to change - let's change this by Thursday)
  accept the lovely discovery that change is good and must happen
  prioritise "things we fundamentally need to change" over "things it seems easy to change" and "things we'd just like to"/"things that superficially justify a paycheck"
  reject change that doesn't improve until it can be fixed, or reimagined, and does actually, tangibly improve
  effectively recruit, assess and manage those tasked with steering, driving and implementing all this.

Mason wrote:

Konveyor Belt wrote:The Flow software and most of Wikimedia is designed from the top down. What I mean by this is that they worry so much about levels of indenting and how to make sure conversations are structured that they forget to install basic features like deleting and editing posts.

Yep. Thing is, top-down design works great if you're a brilliant designer. Apple's famous for designing how it thinks things should be, rather than what the public expects, and leading the marketplace in its direction.

But there's a difference between saying "our smart phones don't have USB ports, and they won't, love it or leave it" and "oh, we didn't know you'd need a way of entering a '4' in a phone number. Could you just hit '2' twice? No? That calls a different number? OK, well, we'll put that in Bugzilla for considering in Q2 but meanwhile here we're going to go ahead and ship a million of them."

⎈ It's Only The Truth That Hurts WPO Barnstar

Randy from Boise wrote: I am awarding Mason/28 Bytes the

⎈ It's Only The Truth That Hurts WPO Barnstar

Nicely played.

Jim wrote: Oh, and I looked at the Flow test pages Fram got so upset about, and the history, and saw what he said and did. He's right. It's amateur hour. Flow is a huge change to the way wikipedia functions. It will never work like this. It's incredible they think it will. I know we say this all the time, but really, this could be a cock-up too far. There might not be any way back after this.

Randy from Boise wrote:

Jim wrote: Oh, and I looked at the Flow test pages Fram got so upset about, and the history, and saw what he said and did. He's right. It's amateur hour. Flow is a huge change to the way wikipedia functions. It will never work like this. It's incredible they think it will. I know we say this all the time, but really, this could be a cock-up too far. There might not be any way back after this.

And here's the deal... Implementing Flow is going to mean the auto-archiving of EVERY EXISTING TALK PAGE.

Whoosh! It will be gone, locked up in safe little archival folders that nobody ever sees.

And this indisputable piece of shit software, based upon a faulty premise that talk-pages need to be "friendly" to the manipulative efforts of every drive-by user, will be ALL THERE IS with NO MEANS OF GOING BACK TO THE STATUS QUO ANTE without the loss of everything generated during the Period of Flow.

Lots of caps above and there needs to be, because the dimwits in San Francisco have probably already invested high six figures or low seven figures of donor dollars in this mess and that means a bureaucratic freight train that will be hard to stop.

Erik Möller needs to be fired, that's the first step in fixing what ails WMF. It's way easier to obsess on diversionary issues...

RfB

Jim wrote: It's almost like they just wanted to get rid of folks like you and I, Tim, and start again with a clean slate.

But that would be... unthinkable... surely?

Randy from Boise wrote:

Jim wrote: It's almost like they just wanted to get rid of folks like you and I, Tim, and start again with a clean slate.

But that would be... unthinkable... surely?

Ha, ha, of course they would love to be able to pick and choose the cast of their "Encyclopedia Anyone Can Edit"™ to eliminate the noisy 5% who are pissing on their parade. Their problem is that the noisy 5% are only stating things which most of the 85% that aren't Wikimania Friendly Space Churchcampers™ also believe — as we witnessed in the recent German RFC on Erik Möller's Superprotection scheme...

The 15% who are actually Churchcampers (many of them with paystubs to prove it) seem to think that with selective purges and magical new software tools an influx of 100,000 diverse, friendly citizen-scholars can be assimilated and indoctrinated into the WikiWay and that a blissful Friendly, Forgiving, Cooperative, Loving WikiWorld will result.

Of course this is bollocks...

RfB

Jim wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:

Jim wrote: It's almost like they just wanted to get rid of folks like you and I, Tim, and start again with a clean slate.

But that would be... unthinkable... surely?

Ha, ha, of course they would love to be able to pick and choose the cast of their "Encyclopedia Anyone Can Edit"™ to eliminate the noisy 5% who are pissing on their parade. Their problem is that the noisy 5% are only stating things which most of the 85% that aren't Wikimania Friendly Space Churchcampers™ also believe — as we witnessed in the recent German RFC on Erik Möller's Superprotection scheme...

The 15% who are actually Churchcampers (many of them with paystubs to prove it) seem to think that with selective purges and magical new software tools an influx of 100,000 diverse, friendly citizen-scholars can be assimilated and indoctrinated into the WikiWay and that a blissful Friendly, Forgiving, Cooperative, Loving WikiWorld will result.

Of course this is bollocks...

RfB

Don't underestimate their ability to believe that the aim is achievable and desirable, and that what they are doing is a means to it.
After all, we just spent several threads expounding on their lack of strategic awareness.

Just saying..

Jim wrote:We basically agree, then.
I'm just not sure what the outcome of your "shitstorm" would be.
I don't think it would be good.

Randy from Boise wrote:

Jim wrote:We basically agree, then.
I'm just not sure what the outcome of your "shitstorm" would be.
I don't think it would be good.

WMF has a poor record in shitstorms.

They are a minority faction after all. Much like Tolkien's Ents, when things get stirred up the majority has strength beyond the minority's imagination. WMF has proven itself incapable of withstanding the onslaught more than once now.

Bureaucrats need a steady pond with a self-policing majority to operate... That's all they want really — calm water and increasing cash so their budgeting doesn't require hard choices. Shitstorms cause rough water and have the potential to imperil the cash flow...

RfB

Jim wrote:

Randy from Boise wrote:

Jim wrote:We basically agree, then.
I'm just not sure what the outcome of your "shitstorm" would be.
I don't think it would be good.

WMF has a poor record in shitstorms.

They are a minority faction after all. Much like Tolkien's Ents, when things get stirred up the majority has strength beyond the minority's imagination. WMF has proven itself incapable of withstanding the onslaught more than once now.

Bureaucrats need a steady pond with a self-policing majority to operate... That's all they want really — calm water and increasing cash so their budgeting doesn't require hard choices. Shitstorms cause rough water and have the potential to imperil the cash flow...

RfB

And Tim, I love you, but it's not going that way right now, is it? They are fucking up bigtime, to an extent I have never seen before, and which may even be ultimately irretrievable.

I still think Flow could be the death of 'em. Not immediately, not in a big lightning strike. But they don't know when to pull back. At all.

Randy from Boise wrote:I'm sanguine about this. There is a lot of pushing and shoving but thanks to the resolute effort of De-WP I think that the result is a stalemate rather than the resounding WMF victory that would have made Flow an inevitability.

If WMF is forced to prove that piece of shit WORKS before they can install it, they never will.

RfB