Crowdsourcing justice

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
kołdry
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Peter Damian » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:07 am

Malleus wrote: I've seen more and more of these indefinite blocks applied under the ruse that indefinite does't mean infinite, when for any clear-headed self-respecting individual it most certainly does mean infinite. ... So, to get back somewhat on track, that's why so many editors are tempted to go down the "sockpuppeting" route.
Exactly. Any appeal to the govcom is met by silence or ignorance, and if you do establish a line of communication, usually with a member of the committee who is familiar with the case, the deliberation is secret and you have no idea why they came to their decision. There is always a degree of humiliation involved, of course. The committee members are terribly self-important and regard themselves as a sort of high court of justice. It can take months. Twice they came back with 'come back in six months'. Some of the arbcom members, when they were not being self-important or sanctimonious, could be quite rude ('you are a nasty piece of work').

Alternatively, twice in my case, someone emails you and offers to put a notice up on the 'community' noticeboard, which means a lot of people can queue up to insult and disparage you, often on grounds that are quite weird (see the 'Saruman' comment below). Often it's just plain abusive. Remember you are not allowed to be present and defend yourself against these slurs.

" I've fogiven [sic] the others (yourself included) but I will not, nor will I ever, likely forgive him. He is a troll. Plain and simple."
"Peter Damian is a jerk. The project is better off without him. "
"For those who weren't around, if you happen to be familiar with the Lord of the Rings, it may help you get the picture if I say that Peter Damian is our version of Saruman -- intelligent and erudite, but not to be listened to at peril of your soul. "
"His past behavior showed a level of malice of the sort that does not go vanish over time, and his capabilities make him too dangerous to fool around with. "
"Are we not yet tired of having our chain yanked by people like this? "
"This individual is utterly unfit to be a member of this community. "

Or they will ask to correct ideological deviation or ask you to 'reform', like Stalinists.

"Peter needs ... to make appropriate commitments . "
"There seems ample evidence that this is somebody the encyclopedia does not need ... it's blatantly obvious that he has not reformed in the least".
"There are some who are able to learn from their mistakes and change themselves, and some who aren't, and Peter Damian has sadly demonstrated he's in the latter category."

Or they will appeal to the community/interests of the project, on the grounds that you are 'harmful to the community' or some such. Quite why you are harmful to the community by writing articles on medieval philosophers is not explained.

"What PD still doesn't understand is that "the project" is more than just the encyclopedia; it is also the community of people creating the encyclopedia. Good editors who are harmful to the community do not constitute a net benefit, in my opinion. "
"the interests of the encyclopedia are not why he wants to edit the article in question. "
"If he's not willing to follow the "don't edit when banned" rule, what other rules is he not willing to follow? "
"This is not a teenager who has now matured. This is someone whose effect on the encyclopedia has been overwhelmingly negative, and I see no reason to think that would change. "
"Socking during a ban is just the tip of the iceberg. The bulk of the iceberg is Damian's bad faith towards the community. "

Many of the comments, probably most, are on the lines of 'rules are rules'. There is actually some sense in this - of course any organisation needs rules - but no one questions whether the rules make any sense.

"Quality contributions do not make up for disrupting the site and ignoring it's [sic] policies. "
"Bringing up his quality contributions as a mitigating factor acctually convinces me more to oppose, we cannot be seen to give someone a 'pass' for civility/PA/sockpuppeting/whatever because they made some good edits."
"The socking is evidence that Damian can't let it lie and serve a sentence; that fixation isn't helpful. We don't give passes for good contributions; there's a tacit agreement that he has continually broken".
"We can't allow socking or what sense does it make to block someone? "
"Socking is either bad, or it is not. "
"Yes, we need more quality editors. No, we don't need more editors who think their contributions justify their actions. "
"He may be a valuable contributor, but he needs to follow the rules "
"I never buy the argument that x is such a good editor that their bad behaviour doesn't matter: no-one is that good, and no-one is indispensable. "Helpful socking"? don't think so."
"On the benefit side is that he wants to edit here, he's been variously a good editor, he's made featured quality articles, etc. On the cost side is that he used a sock to promote an article to featured quality. "
"Sockpuppeting is dishonest"
"Although I agree we need more good writers, researchers and philosophers, I have to oppose unbanning this user or any user who flouts Wikipedia rules in such a manner"
"We definitely don't want to set a precedent here, that banned users can freely sock with good editing and then be forgiven by the community. "

Even in the French revolution I believe they had a kind of court system, with proceedings held in the light of day, selected representatives, a formal procedure and so on. As far as I know, they did not allow the gossipers and knitters who gathered round the guillotine to be judge and jury (I may be wrong).

Of course if you challenge Wikipedians on this they will rehearse platitudes like 'Wikipedia is not fair', 'there is no justice on Wikipedia' etc. Which suggests Wikipedia is not a very nice place, doesn't it?
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by thekohser » Sat Mar 16, 2013 12:47 pm

I could post a similar laundry list of comments that were ever made surrounding discussions of unblocking me. But, I just don't have time to rehash it all and reopen old wounds.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Peter Damian » Sat Mar 16, 2013 12:50 pm

thekohser wrote:I could post a similar laundry list of comments that were ever made surrounding discussions of unblocking me. But, I just don't have time to rehash it all and reopen old wounds.
Quite. I never published the list before, simply because it was too horrible. People who have this vision of you as a troll or as a smooth-tongued Saruman or whatever simply don't see you as a human being. They have no concept of the pain and distress it causes. It wouldn't be nearly so bad if you could stand in front of them and argue reasonably with them. But you aren't allowed to.

[edit] The reason I am posting it now is because time has passed, and because there is a considerable influx of new readers of this forum. They need to see some of the bad things that happen at Wikipedia, and see what their 'community' is really like.
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Hex » Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:12 pm

Thanks for posting that, Peter, I can imagine it must have been painful to read again.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

roger_pearse
Regular
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:41 pm
Wikipedia User: Roger Pearse
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by roger_pearse » Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:14 pm

Peter Damian wrote:
thekohser wrote:I could post a similar laundry list of comments that were ever made surrounding discussions of unblocking me. But, I just don't have time to rehash it all and reopen old wounds.
Quite. I never published the list before, simply because it was too horrible. People who have this vision of you as a troll or as a smooth-tongued Saruman or whatever simply don't see you as a human being. They have no concept of the pain and distress it causes.
I think it is really valuable (and probably took some courage) to post it. I suspect that most people, receiving the hail of accusations and abuse, are simply embarassed, hurt, and want it all to go away. So the last thing they will do is recount what happened to them. I found it hard enough to describe my own experience -- I really, really didn't want to go into all the "he said this, that one said this" stuff, not least because I simply don't do that kind of crap. I'm simply not interested in personalities at the best of times. So there is a massive psychological disincentive to going over what happened, when you are a victim of the system. And this means that the abuse goes unreported.

The "group lynching" in a forum is a form of abuse as old as usenet. There's nothing much one can do once it is underway, and it is terribly harmful to normal people who haven't developed total indifference.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by DanMurphy » Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:13 pm

"For those who weren't around, if you happen to be familiar with the Lord of the Rings, it may help you get the picture if I say that Peter Damian is our version of Saruman -- intelligent and erudite, but not to be listened to at peril of your soul. "

"His past behavior showed a level of malice of the sort that does not go vanish over time, and his capabilities make him too dangerous to fool around with. "
These kinds of comments are really about the cultish though processes and paranoia of a not inconsiderable number of committed Wikipedians. They are saying you are a danger precisely because you are clever and competent, and you've combined that with an independent spirit of mind that threatens to poison their special little community.

We cannot have such people wandering about, pouring dangerously honeyed words into the ears of our flock. Like the very Devil himself, he sidles up with a smile and before you notice he's led you off the path of righteousness on a ride that inevitably ends in the fiery pit.

Best to cast out the Devil entirely, to build higher walls and chant more powerful incantations to keep him out.

But he is also tricksy and a shape-shifter. He might be walking among us again, in the guise of a handsome, friendly stranger. Look, that new fellow over there seems competent and helpful, almost... clever.

Ban him! For it is HE!

Etc...

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Peter Damian » Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:22 pm

[Hit the wrong button]
*I feel your pain. --Zoloft
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

roger_pearse
Regular
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:41 pm
Wikipedia User: Roger Pearse
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by roger_pearse » Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:29 pm

DanMurphy wrote:These kinds of comments are really about the cultish though processes and paranoia of a not inconsiderable number of committed Wikipedians. ...
Not really. It's just what you get in a playground, when a group of little boys gang up to taunt some unfortunate. They say *anything*, so long as it's malicious. Any attribute the victim has will be jeered at, twisted into a fault, or whatever. Every word is designed to be heard, to twist the knife. Nothing more. None of what is said has any purpose other than to give pain. None of it is fair or balanced.

In an adult environment, of course, such behaviour is very quickly clamped down on, should anyone be so childish as to do it.

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by DanMurphy » Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:34 pm

roger_pearse wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:These kinds of comments are really about the cultish though processes and paranoia of a not inconsiderable number of committed Wikipedians. ...
Not really. It's just what you get in a playground, when a group of little boys gang up to taunt some unfortunate. They say *anything*, so long as it's malicious. Any attribute the victim has will be jeered at, twisted into a fault, or whatever. Every word is designed to be heard, to twist the knife. Nothing more. None of what is said has any purpose other than to give pain. None of it is fair or balanced.

In an adult environment, of course, such behaviour is very quickly clamped down on, should anyone be so childish as to do it.
Well, maybe you're right. But I've never seen kids taunt another kid by suggesting his views are dangerous and that "you're too smart for us, so we have to stuff our ears with cotton wool when you're around otherwise you'll trick us into doing your bidding."

User avatar
Peter Damian
Habitué
Posts: 4201
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Peter Damian
Wikipedia Review Member: Peter Damian
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Peter Damian » Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:46 pm

DanMurphy wrote:
roger_pearse wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:These kinds of comments are really about the cultish though processes and paranoia of a not inconsiderable number of committed Wikipedians. ...
Not really. It's just what you get in a playground, when a group of little boys gang up to taunt some unfortunate. They say *anything*, so long as it's malicious. Any attribute the victim has will be jeered at, twisted into a fault, or whatever. Every word is designed to be heard, to twist the knife. Nothing more. None of what is said has any purpose other than to give pain. None of it is fair or balanced.

In an adult environment, of course, such behaviour is very quickly clamped down on, should anyone be so childish as to do it.
Well, maybe you're right. But I've never seen kids taunt another kid by suggesting his views are dangerous and that "you're too smart for us, so we have to stuff our ears with cotton wool when you're around otherwise you'll trick us into doing your bidding."
"The signet of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty ... blameless in your ways from the day you were created, until unrighteousness was found in you.... Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendour". I'm sure Tolkien (a Catholic) had that passage in mind when he created the Saruman character.
οὐκ ἀγαθὸν πολυκοιρανίη: εἷς κοίρανος ἔστω

Volunteer Marek
Habitué
Posts: 1383
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:16 am
Wikipedia User: Volunteer Marek

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Volunteer Marek » Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:58 pm

Exactly. Any appeal to the govcom is met by silence or ignorance...
I think some of the recent events show that the word "Any" does not necessarily belong in that sentence. If you got some buds on the committee, and/or you have admin powers on another project, then they'll happily hear and grant your appeal... even if you've got a long long track record of being extremely obnoxious and mostly just causing trouble.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by EricBarbour » Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:22 pm

roger_pearse wrote: It's just what you get in a playground, when a group of little boys gang up to taunt some unfortunate.
And with that, I give you an example of Wikipedia's "leadership".
Image

User avatar
piku
Critic
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 3:30 pm
Wikipedia User: Pieter Kuiper
Wikipedia Review Member: pietkuip

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by piku » Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:49 pm

Peter Damian wrote: Or they will ask to correct ideological deviation or ask you to 'reform', like Stalinists.
"Peter needs ... to make appropriate commitments . "
Indeed, the same stuff as on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commo ... ter_Kuiper

User avatar
3 to 20 characters
Retired
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:00 am
Wikipedia User: McRap (et al.)

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by 3 to 20 characters » Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:56 pm

Wow Peter. Your swag of campaign medals is much longer than my own. I'm almost embarrassed by the comparison.

The worst thing is, there is no losing sight of the organization that denounced you in that manner. It dominates the landscape like a 100-foot tall billboard. Like a cathedral towering over a heretic. You can always fart as you go past. And loudly too. If there are angels in heaven, they'll take it as a pious prayer.

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Zoloft » Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:45 am

3 to 20 characters wrote:Wow Peter. Your swag of campaign medals is much longer than my own. I'm almost embarrassed by the comparison.

The worst thing is, there is no losing sight of the organization that denounced you in that manner. It dominates the landscape like a 100-foot tall billboard. Like a cathedral towering over a heretic. You can always fart as you go past. And loudly too. If there are angels in heaven, they'll take it as a pious prayer.
If the smell is coming from inside, it's probably Jimbo having a 'thoughtful' moment.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Sun Mar 17, 2013 1:51 am

3 to 20 characters wrote:Wow Peter. Your swag of campaign medals is much longer than my own. I'm almost embarrassed by the comparison.

The worst thing is, there is no losing sight of the organization that denounced you in that manner. It dominates the landscape like a 100-foot tall billboard. Like a cathedral towering over a heretic. You can always fart as you go past. And loudly too. If there are angels in heaven, they'll take it as a pious prayer.
I'm against burning heretics and I think Peter should be back in, following appropriate apologies from Wikipedia to him.

Samokritika works both ways.

RfB

Volunteer Marek
Habitué
Posts: 1383
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:16 am
Wikipedia User: Volunteer Marek

Re: Crowdsourcing justice

Unread post by Volunteer Marek » Sun Mar 17, 2013 3:49 am

Randy from Boise wrote:
3 to 20 characters wrote:Wow Peter. Your swag of campaign medals is much longer than my own. I'm almost embarrassed by the comparison.

The worst thing is, there is no losing sight of the organization that denounced you in that manner. It dominates the landscape like a 100-foot tall billboard. Like a cathedral towering over a heretic. You can always fart as you go past. And loudly too. If there are angels in heaven, they'll take it as a pious prayer.
I'm against burning heretics and I think Peter should be back in, following appropriate apologies from Wikipedia to him.

Samokritika works both ways.

RfB
Well, if they survive long enough, they probably will go into the "rehabilitation" stage at some point.

Post Reply