WMF and Community Changes Wishlist

[wllm]

* fiercely aggressive child protection policy

The list that Vigilant kicked things off with seemed like a pretty good summary of the most commonly mentioned improvements. Interestingly, a lot of folks mentioned a child protection policy, but I didn't parse out many details in this thread. I assuming it would involve several measures, some of which might be enforced technologically. What are the most effective measures that can be taken, IYO? Considering that this is one of those relatively rare issues that leaves absolutely no room for mistakes, how can the community be sure non-technical measures are 100% enforced, 100% of the time?

Can you read over this link, please,

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_ta ... protection

... and let me know what you think. Many of us work on-wiki on child protection issues, have been bringing up serious issues for *years* now, yet the response from the WMF has been woefully inadequate to-date.

Wil, I'd really like to know what your take is on this, especially in the light of Sue Gardner's impending exit and her leaving this untouched for her successor to pick up. It's a pretty major part of what's wrong with Wikipedia.

I've read that thread a few times now, and I think it goes in to enough details on both your issues and the WMF's official position with timestamps showing when each concern was expressed for most people to form their own preliminary conclusions and an interest to look in to the matter further. I also think my own opinion is far less important than the WMF's attaining their goal of transparency for the Wikipedia community and users. I think it's possible that the WMF doesn't realize that many users aren't aware of this issue and what they have done to address it, and I think that my continuing to participate in the discussion here may facilitate more transparency all around. Finally, I think that expressing my own views wouldn't serve this goal of transparency; after all, the issue is about what the WMF and the WP community can do to protect children and not my personal beliefs around how best to go about that.

This answer may seem like a cop out, but I encourage you to read it at its word and from the perspectives of everyone else who may be reading it- whether they choose to contribute their own voices here or not. Personally, I think it is anything but.

[Vigilant]

Here is an example of where someone complained on Jimmy Wales' talk page about getting NSFW stuff for a completely harmless query.

She was flamed. Wales did nothing, except hide the discussion (it's at the bottom of the page, "Discussion winding down"; you have to click on "Show" to see it).

She was deliberately humiliated in a sexualized way by a prominent Commons administrator (Russavia) who compared her concerns to his public masturbation; an extremely unfunny 'joke'. It was absolutely disgusting. What possible hope can we have, when one of Commons' own administrators and OTRS volunteers becomes abusive when someone raises genuine concerns?

And what happened to Russavia as a result? Absolutely nothing.

It's truly amazing how often Scott Bibby aka Russavia aka commissioner of a painting of Jimbo using someone's dick had been allowed to beard Jimbo on his own talk page.

Kind of awe inspiring in a strange way.

[Midsize Jake]

I think it's possible that the WMF doesn't realize that many users aren't aware of this issue and what they have done to address it...

On the contrary, I think they not only realize it, they're counting on it!

...and I think that my continuing to participate in the discussion here may facilitate more transparency all around.

Transparency isn't necessarily what's required here; what's required are standards, and then enforcement of the standards. You'll find that the WMF can go on for literally years taking the non-position of "we need to facilitate more discussion of this issue" when their real goal is to avoid doing anything that might lead to complaints from the user base about how the WMF is trying to thwart them in some way. They're just like all the worst corporate/political bureaucracies in that respect.

[lilburne]

I think it's possible that the WMF doesn't realize that many users aren't aware of this issue and what they have done to address it...

On the contrary, I think they not only realize it, they're counting on it!

...and I think that my continuing to participate in the discussion here may facilitate more transparency all around.

Transparency isn't necessarily what's required here; what's required are standards, and then enforcement of the standards. You'll find that the WMF can go on for literally years taking the non-position of "we need to facilitate more discussion of this issue" when their real goal is to avoid doing anything that might lead to complaints from the user base about how the WMF is trying to thwart them in some way. They're just like all the worst corporate/political bureaucracies in that respect.

The WMF are a waste of skin wrapped around a core of shit. Or is it that the WP COMMUNITAH is the waste of skin wrapped around the core of shit that is the WMF.

Dunno. But either way the WMF are NOT good citizens, have abrogated any responsibility for a dozen years or more. And when anyone come calling hide behind the door pretending no one is in. It is institutional moral turpitude of shiftiness. the new incumbents will soon learn the ropes, and if they have an standards will decamp as quickly as possible,

[wllm]

I think it's possible that the WMF doesn't realize that many users aren't aware of this issue and what they have done to address it...

On the contrary, I think they not only realize it, they're counting on it!

...and I think that my continuing to participate in the discussion here may facilitate more transparency all around.

Transparency isn't necessarily what's required here; what's required are standards, and then enforcement of the standards. You'll find that the WMF can go on for literally years taking the non-position of "we need to facilitate more discussion of this issue" when their real goal is to avoid doing anything that might lead to complaints from the user base about how the WMF is trying to thwart them in some way. They're just like all the worst corporate/political bureaucracies in that respect.

Again, I urge you to read what I've said carefully and consider what I have to offer this discussion.

Many here feel that they have been marginalized by the WP community. I would even argue that many of you have further and unnecessarily marginalized your own voices with mean-spirited personal attacks- whether you call them jokes or not. Voices in majorities can very effectively evade transparency and inconvenient scrutiny by saying that marginalized voices aren't worth listening to.

My voice, on the other hand, has not been marginalized and will never be, if I can do anything about it. Everyone who has read my comments here knows that I've very carefully expressed opinions on just a few matters. One is that personal attacks are uncool. Another is that every voice deserves to be heard, regardless of where one chooses to speak up. And finally, I believe that practicing free speech and transparency requires more than lip service. So, taking the WMF at their word, I'm standing firm with exactly what the WMF stands for and nothing else. Otherwise, I'm just here asking all of you questions to get to a full understanding of current affairs. At this point, I'll even renege on one of my promises to you so that there are no further question about my influence here or anywhere else: I will *not* deliver any information from these forums to Lila under any circumstances because of the personal relationship I share with her. You're welcome to criticize me on this point; I deserve it. That said, because the WMF is so transparent, her email is readily available for anyone to send any sort of wish list to her themselves, whether put together on this thread through some sort of rough consensus on the biggest issues according to Wikipediocracy or not.

My relationship with Lila only serves to bring more attention to the issues that are brought up here, which is neither my intention nor my fault; sadly, I can't do much about that beyond separating from Lila or disengaging from the whole community. And I'm not willing to do either- in particular, to sever a relationship that no one- including the WMF- has any business getting in to. Obviously, if the WMF and larger WP community chooses to take any position here, they can only support me in my efforts towards truth and transparency or change their often asserted positions. I'm really looking forward to walking hand-in-hand with the WMF on free speech as they walk the walk they talk so much about. Many might say that I'm risking a lot by talking with all of you here, but I will put my trust in the WMF and assert that there is none whatsoever because absolutely no one should disagree with the principles that I'm practicing on this forum- including the principle that it doesn't matter where I practice said principles.

In the meantime, I suggest we just keep talking about the issues at hand. Please don't skimp on the links that back them up with facts. Thanks!

[lilburne]

Many here feel that they have been marginalized by the WP community. I would even argue that many of you have further and unnecessarily marginalized your own voices with mean-spirited personal attacks- whether you call them jokes or not. Voices in majorities can very effectively evade transparency and inconvenient scrutiny by saying that marginalized voices aren't worth listening to.

Consider this. Perhaps marginalizing our own voices is a strategy. In the end what will be seen is that reason was ignored. And for why? Because someone wasn't nice.

[wllm]

Many here feel that they have been marginalized by the WP community. I would even argue that many of you have further and unnecessarily marginalized your own voices with mean-spirited personal attacks- whether you call them jokes or not. Voices in majorities can very effectively evade transparency and inconvenient scrutiny by saying that marginalized voices aren't worth listening to.

Consider this. Perhaps marginalizing our own voices is a strategy. In the end what will be seen is that reason was ignored. And for why? Because someone wasn't nice.

Then that is not an entirely unsound strategy. But I'm here undermining it, because I'm not ignoring you no matter how mean you are to anyone, including myself and my partner. I just don't take that part of what is said seriously- as you have told me I shouldn't- because they are "jokes."

[lilburne]

Many here feel that they have been marginalized by the WP community. I would even argue that many of you have further and unnecessarily marginalized your own voices with mean-spirited personal attacks- whether you call them jokes or not. Voices in majorities can very effectively evade transparency and inconvenient scrutiny by saying that marginalized voices aren't worth listening to.

Consider this. Perhaps marginalizing our own voices is a strategy. In the end what will be seen is that reason was ignored. And for why? Because someone wasn't nice.

Then that is not an entirely unsound strategy. But I'm here undermining it, because I'm not ignoring you no matter how mean you are to anyone, including myself and my partner. I just don't take that part of what is said seriously- as you have told me I shouldn't- because they are "jokes."

You are neither the target, nor the audience.

[wllm]

I think it's possible that the WMF doesn't realize that many users aren't aware of this issue and what they have done to address it...

On the contrary, I think they not only realize it, they're counting on it!

...and I think that my continuing to participate in the discussion here may facilitate more transparency all around.

Transparency isn't necessarily what's required here; what's required are standards, and then enforcement of the standards. You'll find that the WMF can go on for literally years taking the non-position of "we need to facilitate more discussion of this issue" when their real goal is to avoid doing anything that might lead to complaints from the user base about how the WMF is trying to thwart them in some way. They're just like all the worst corporate/political bureaucracies in that respect.

The WMF are a waste of skin wrapped around a core of shit. Or is it that the WP COMMUNITAH is the waste of skin wrapped around the core of shit that is the WMF.

Dunno. But either way the WMF are NOT good citizens, have abrogated any responsibility for a dozen years or more. And when anyone come calling hide behind the door pretending no one is in. It is institutional moral turpitude of shiftiness. the new incumbents will soon learn the ropes, and if they have an standards will decamp as quickly as possible,

I would like nothing more than to prove you wrong on this point. I encourage all of you to give them this chance: they will either stand by my freedom of speech and search for truth or they won't. If they do, then at least one of you will be wrong in saying that they will ask me to stop posting here.

Please, everyone, a chance like this won't be coming along every day for you, me, or the WMF. If we want them to give us the benefit of the doubt, we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, too.

[Kumioko]

Many here feel that they have been marginalized by the WP community. I would even argue that many of you have further and unnecessarily marginalized your own voices with mean-spirited personal attacks- whether you call them jokes or not. Voices in majorities can very effectively evade transparency and inconvenient scrutiny by saying that marginalized voices aren't worth listening to.

Consider this. Perhaps marginalizing our own voices is a strategy. In the end what will be seen is that reason was ignored. And for why? Because someone wasn't nice.

Then that is not an entirely unsound strategy. But I'm here undermining it, because I'm not ignoring you no matter how mean you are to anyone, including myself and my partner. I just don't take that part of what is said seriously- as you have told me I shouldn't- because they are "jokes."

For what its worth, I never really thought that the majority of our comments were coming up in Idle conversation with you and your partner at home. Maybe the occassional what a bunch of nuts or something.

[Vigilant]

I think it's possible that the WMF doesn't realize that many users aren't aware of this issue and what they have done to address it...

On the contrary, I think they not only realize it, they're counting on it!

...and I think that my continuing to participate in the discussion here may facilitate more transparency all around.

Transparency isn't necessarily what's required here; what's required are standards, and then enforcement of the standards. You'll find that the WMF can go on for literally years taking the non-position of "we need to facilitate more discussion of this issue" when their real goal is to avoid doing anything that might lead to complaints from the user base about how the WMF is trying to thwart them in some way. They're just like all the worst corporate/political bureaucracies in that respect.

The WMF are a waste of skin wrapped around a core of shit. Or is it that the WP COMMUNITAH is the waste of skin wrapped around the core of shit that is the WMF.

Dunno. But either way the WMF are NOT good citizens, have abrogated any responsibility for a dozen years or more. And when anyone come calling hide behind the door pretending no one is in. It is institutional moral turpitude of shiftiness. the new incumbents will soon learn the ropes, and if they have an standards will decamp as quickly as possible,

I would like nothing more than to prove you wrong on this point. I encourage all of you to give them this chance: they will either stand by my freedom of speech and search for truth or they won't. If they do, then at least one of you will be wrong in saying that they will ask me to stop posting here.

Please, everyone, a chance like this won't be coming along every day for you, me, or the WMF. If we want them to give us the benefit of the doubt, we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, too.

You really think they care what you think about them?

[lilburne]

The WMF are a waste of skin wrapped around a core of shit. Or is it that the WP COMMUNITAH is the waste of skin wrapped around the core of shit that is the WMF.

Dunno. But either way the WMF are NOT good citizens, have abrogated any responsibility for a dozen years or more. And when anyone come calling hide behind the door pretending no one is in. It is institutional moral turpitude of shiftiness. the new incumbents will soon learn the ropes, and if they have an standards will decamp as quickly as possible,

I would like nothing more than to prove you wrong on this point. I encourage all of you to give them this chance: they will either stand by my freedom of speech and search for truth or they won't. If they do, then at least one of you will be wrong in saying that they will ask me to stop posting here.

Please, everyone, a chance like this won't be coming along every day for you, me, or the WMF. If we want them to give us the benefit of the doubt, we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, too.

They lost that several years ago. Would be nice to be wrong. But I have the "throw a temper tantrum" community that is prone to kick up its heels with crys of NOTCENSORED, and a WMF that hasn't done a damn thing about the problems in a dozen years or more and wraps itself in "Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act".

ADDENDUM:

The WMF will ignore all problems: Child Protection, Defamation, Onsite Bullying, Racism, Misogyny, and everything else up until the point that cops are knocking at the door, or the donation money is drying up. Until that point they'll do sweet fuck all. In my book that is not providing any sort of a public service.

[Vigilant]

The WMF are a waste of skin wrapped around a core of shit. Or is it that the WP COMMUNITAH is the waste of skin wrapped around the core of shit that is the WMF.

Dunno. But either way the WMF are NOT good citizens, have abrogated any responsibility for a dozen years or more. And when anyone come calling hide behind the door pretending no one is in. It is institutional moral turpitude of shiftiness. the new incumbents will soon learn the ropes, and if they have an standards will decamp as quickly as possible,

I would like nothing more than to prove you wrong on this point. I encourage all of you to give them this chance: they will either stand by my freedom of speech and search for truth or they won't. If they do, then at least one of you will be wrong in saying that they will ask me to stop posting here.

Please, everyone, a chance like this won't be coming along every day for you, me, or the WMF. If we want them to give us the benefit of the doubt, we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, too.

They lost that several years ago. Would be nice to be wrong. But I have the "throw a temper tantrum" community that is prone to kick up its heels with crys of NOTCENSORED, and a WMF that hasn't done a damn thing about the problems in a dozen years or more and wraps itself in "Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act".

ADDENDUM:

The WMF will ignore all problems: Child Protection, Defamation, Onsite Bullying, Racism, Misogyny, and everything else up until the point that cops are knocking at the door, or the donation money is drying up. Until that point they'll do sweet fuck all. In my book that is not providing any sort of a public service.

Or until the news media gets involved.

[Midsize Jake]

Again, I urge you to read what I've said carefully and consider what I have to offer this discussion.

Was I not doing that? You basically stated that you were willing to take the WMF "at their word" (about taking the issue seriously), and that (for some unspecified reason) the goal here should be "more transparency." If that's not what you meant, then OK, I'm a clod, and could you maybe state it more simply next time for the benefit of clods like me the world over?

Many might say that I'm risking a lot by talking with all of you here, but I will put my trust in the WMF and assert that there is none whatsoever because absolutely no one should disagree with the principles that I'm practicing on this forum- including the principle that it doesn't matter where I practice said principles.

Again on the contrary, I'd say you personally risk next to nothing by participating here, assuming Ms. Tretikov is OK with it. (It might be nice to see a public statement from her that she's OK with it, but I certainly understand why she wouldn't want to do that.) And they won't disagree with the principles, they'll simply call you a "loose cannon" and various other things merely because you have a Wikipediocracy account. (They might not say it to your face, of course.)

Remember, Wikipedia isn't concerned with "free speech" and never has been. If that's your impression, then you still have much to learn, young padawan.

In the meantime, I suggest we just keep talking about the issues at hand.

Well, again, the issue with regard to child-protection policy is that people who support the idea have either given up on the "community" as the source of a solution, or don't believe the community has any business being involved at all. Acceptance of one or both of those realities is practically universal by now, but the Foundation still does nothing - they merely want to "facilitate discussion," which sounds a lot like tossing the ball back into the community's court, knowing that ball will just lie there motionless forever. Meanwhile, none of this has anything to do with "transparency" - I'm not saying transparency would be a bad thing, but at this point, if the WMF were to produce a meaningful policy statement (or even a proposal) on this issue, I doubt anyone here would really care if they'd assembled it whilst locked deep in an underground bunker with no access to the rest of the world in or out whatsoever. At least it would be something.

[Vigilant]

Part of the problem is that the WMF is staffed with morons.
They might even realize that they're morons and they KNOW that if they rock the boat, they'll have to go find a new job.
Given the internal demographics, can anyone really be surprised that they're afraid to do ANYTHING?

Especially after the righteous anal packing that Erik and James got over the VenerealEditor?

[thekohser]

...personal attacks are uncool.

I'll clean up the very moment that Wikipedia does. In my case, "they" very much started it.

[wllm]

I think it's possible that the WMF doesn't realize that many users aren't aware of this issue and what they have done to address it...

On the contrary, I think they not only realize it, they're counting on it!

...and I think that my continuing to participate in the discussion here may facilitate more transparency all around.

Transparency isn't necessarily what's required here; what's required are standards, and then enforcement of the standards. You'll find that the WMF can go on for literally years taking the non-position of "we need to facilitate more discussion of this issue" when their real goal is to avoid doing anything that might lead to complaints from the user base about how the WMF is trying to thwart them in some way. They're just like all the worst corporate/political bureaucracies in that respect.

The WMF are a waste of skin wrapped around a core of shit. Or is it that the WP COMMUNITAH is the waste of skin wrapped around the core of shit that is the WMF.

Dunno. But either way the WMF are NOT good citizens, have abrogated any responsibility for a dozen years or more. And when anyone come calling hide behind the door pretending no one is in. It is institutional moral turpitude of shiftiness. the new incumbents will soon learn the ropes, and if they have an standards will decamp as quickly as possible,

I would like nothing more than to prove you wrong on this point. I encourage all of you to give them this chance: they will either stand by my freedom of speech and search for truth or they won't. If they do, then at least one of you will be wrong in saying that they will ask me to stop posting here.

Please, everyone, a chance like this won't be coming along every day for you, me, or the WMF. If we want them to give us the benefit of the doubt, we have to give them the benefit of the doubt, too.

You really think they care what you think about them?

No, I *know* that they do, tho they shouldn't care about my opinion any more or less than the opinion of anyone else reading this thread. And I hope that this is the case.

Right now, they have a chance to show that they also care about my right to free speech. And I hope they will take will have and take the chance to show each and every one reading this the same in the future.

[lilburne]

Right now, they have a chance to show that they also care about my right to free speech. And I hope they will take will have and take the chance to show each and every one reading this the same in the future.

Oh I just love internet speak about free speech, don't you just love internet speak about free speech link

[Kelly Martin]

My voice, on the other hand, has not been marginalized and will never be, if I can do anything about it.

Best of luck with that.

So, taking the WMF at their word, I'm standing firm with exactly what the WMF stands for and nothing else.

And that would be your first mistake: you are taking the WMF at their word.

I will *not* deliver any information from these forums to Lila under any circumstances because of the personal relationship I share with her.

Then there is no point in dealing with you here, and I (at least) will respond further to what you have to say here only when doing so will serve the purpose of educating the public (e.g. to refute any particularly idiotic claims you might make). It's clear that there's no point in seeking to educate you, since you have already vowed to not act based on what you learn here.

[lilburne]

It's clear that there's no point in seeking to educate you, since you have already vowed to not act based on what you learn here.

He seems to have already learnt the WMF refrain.

Code: Select all

So I offer expert counsel, others may well over-ride.
For I'm not the final arbiter, that cannot be denied.
And I can't be held responsible for what I don't decide.

[SB_Johnny]

My voice, on the other hand, has not been marginalized and will never be, if I can do anything about it.

Best of luck with that.

So, taking the WMF at their word, I'm standing firm with exactly what the WMF stands for and nothing else.

And that would be your first mistake: you are taking the WMF at their word.

I will *not* deliver any information from these forums to Lila under any circumstances because of the personal relationship I share with her.

Then there is no point in dealing with you here, and I (at least) will respond further to what you have to say here only when doing so will serve the purpose of educating the public (e.g. to refute any particularly idiotic claims you might make). It's clear that there's no point in seeking to educate you, since you have already vowed to not act based on what you learn here.

IOW, dear ,Wil, they shouldn't have sent you here to be their goodwill ambassador, because you're completely transparent (not to mention either an inept spokeman or just out of your depth).

Convince Lila to disassociate the WMF from Jimmy Wales, and then we can take you seriously.

[TungstenCarbide]

... Many here feel that they have been marginalized by the WP community. I would even argue that many of you have further and unnecessarily marginalized your own voices with mean-spirited personal attacks- whether you call them jokes or not. Voices in majorities can very effectively evade transparency and inconvenient scrutiny by saying that marginalized voices aren't worth listening to.

The thing about the Wikipedia community is that they are more concerned with 'The Wikipedia Community' than with the product. That's not the case in other open-source projects I'm familiar with that produce a high quality product.

I will *not* deliver any information from these forums to Lila under any circumstances because of the personal relationship I share with her.

Then there is no point in dealing with you here, and I (at least) will respond further to what you have to say here only when doing so will serve the purpose of educating the public (e.g. to refute any particularly idiotic claims you might make). It's clear that there's no point in seeking to educate you, since you have already vowed to not act based on what you learn here.

This has been a valuable conversation so far. On a forum like this is you get tired of repeating yourself over the years. Things that go without saying for old timers requires explaining and justifying for a newbie like wllm. That's valuable feedback to improve communication.

[Kelly Martin]

This has been a valuable conversation so far. One of the things that happens on a forum like this is you get tired of repeating things over the years. Things that go without saying for old timers requires repeating and explaining and justifying for a newbie like wllm. That's valuable feedback to improve communication.

There is truth to that. Wil's appearance has spurred a number of us to collate and present our collective experience for his consumption. But we've done that now, and so his utility in that regard is pretty much spent.

It would probably be a good idea if we periodically (maybe once a year) ran over our blog posts of the previous year or so, publishing "updates" of them where it seems pertinent, noting changes or the lack of change, as appropriate. Something to talk about at the next Trustees' Brunch, I suppose.

[wllm]

My voice, on the other hand, has not been marginalized and will never be, if I can do anything about it.

Best of luck with that.

So, taking the WMF at their word, I'm standing firm with exactly what the WMF stands for and nothing else.

And that would be your first mistake: you are taking the WMF at their word.

I will *not* deliver any information from these forums to Lila under any circumstances because of the personal relationship I share with her.

Then there is no point in dealing with you here, and I (at least) will respond further to what you have to say here only when doing so will serve the purpose of educating the public (e.g. to refute any particularly idiotic claims you might make). It's clear that there's no point in seeking to educate you, since you have already vowed to not act based on what you learn here.

IOW, dear ,Wil, they shouldn't have sent you here to be their goodwill ambassador

They did not send me here at all. Like I said, I have no affiliation with them; I do what I please, whether it pleases them or not. And what pleases me is doing what I believe is the right- that is, most just- thing to do.

I'm curious: does anyone else in this forum see my being here any differently? Does anyone else read what I've written above as something other than my agreeing with or somehow representing the WMF?

[Vigilant]

My voice, on the other hand, has not been marginalized and will never be, if I can do anything about it.

Best of luck with that.

So, taking the WMF at their word, I'm standing firm with exactly what the WMF stands for and nothing else.

And that would be your first mistake: you are taking the WMF at their word.

I will *not* deliver any information from these forums to Lila under any circumstances because of the personal relationship I share with her.

Then there is no point in dealing with you here, and I (at least) will respond further to what you have to say here only when doing so will serve the purpose of educating the public (e.g. to refute any particularly idiotic claims you might make). It's clear that there's no point in seeking to educate you, since you have already vowed to not act based on what you learn here.

IOW, dear ,Wil, they shouldn't have sent you here to be their goodwill ambassador

They did not send me here at all. Like I said, I have no affiliation with them; I do what I please, whether it pleases them or not. And what pleases me is doing what I believe is the right- that is, most just- thing to do.

I'm curious: does anyone else in this forum see my being here any differently? Does anyone else read what I've written above as something other than my agreeing with or somehow representing the WMF?

To be completely honest, I have no idea what you're trying to say above.

[TungstenCarbide]

They did not send me here at all. Like I said, I have no affiliation with them; I do what I please, whether it pleases them or not. And what pleases me is doing what I believe is the right- that is, most just- thing to do.

I'm curious: does anyone else in this forum see my being here any differently? Does anyone else read what I've written above as something other than my agreeing with or somehow representing the WMF?

Just out of curiosity, how did you find out about Wikipediocracy and what had you heard about this site before joining?

[wllm]

They did not send me here at all. Like I said, I have no affiliation with them; I do what I please, whether it pleases them or not. And what pleases me is doing what I believe is the right- that is, most just- thing to do.

I'm curious: does anyone else in this forum see my being here any differently? Does anyone else read what I've written above as something other than my agreeing with or somehow representing the WMF?

Just out of curiosity, how did you find out about Wikipediocracy and what had you heard about this site before joining?

Because it showed up in a Google search on the string "Tretikov" after the announcement and nothing.

[Zoloft]

I think you're sincere, somewhat miffed at the personal asides about your partner, for which I apologize (representing no one but myself), and came here with the motivation to listen and learn. I honestly don't know if you're being pressured by folks in the WMF - and I advise you not to mention it here if you are - your relationship with Lila and her employment is frankly more important to you than a few raw egos on a message board.
In any case, I wish you well, I wish Lila well, a new job and culture are always a challenge.
As far as the WMF's old guard, I'll just say this: unseasonable weather is coming.
Thank you for becoming a member, Wil. Stick around and have some popcorn.

[wllm]

I think you're sincere, somewhat miffed at the personal asides about your partner, for which I apologize (representing no one but myself), and came here with the motivation to listen and learn. I honestly don't know if you're being pressured by folks in the WMF - and I advise you not to mention it here if you are - your relationship with Lila and her employment is frankly more important to you than a few raw egos on a message board.
In any case, I wish you well, I wish Lila well, a new job and culture are always a challenge.
As far as the WMF's old guard, I'll just say this: unseasonable weather is coming.
Thank you for becoming a member, Wil. Stick around and have some popcorn.

[HRIP7]

Convince Lila to disassociate the WMF from Jimmy Wales, and then we can take you seriously.

That's hardly realistic for someone in Lila's position. Besides, Wil has made it clear that he's neither our ambassador chez Tretikov, nor hers here.

If he is himself, and speaks for himself, that's what everyone else is doing here.

[SB_Johnny]

Convince Lila to disassociate the WMF from Jimmy Wales, and then we can take you seriously.

That's hardly realistic for someone in Lila's position. Besides, Wil has made it clear that he's neither our ambassador chez Tretikov, nor hers here.

If he is himself, and speaks for himself, that's what everyone else is doing here.

Well, you need to start the haggling high .

I'm still not clear on where Wil's position is though, since he's certainly implied that he's in personal contact with a number of the inner circle (Möller, etc.). Are you sort of playing the "First Gentleman" role?

I think you'll find that some of the most skeptical people here are those who at one time were in the "management caste" of one or another of the projects (e.g., Kelly or me), or just in general people who have had a lot of contact with Jimbo.

[lilburne]

To be completely honest, I have no idea what you're trying to say above.

Not sure whether he is running with hare or hunting with the hounds. He can't do both and whilst he's trying to make up his mind on way or the other he is in danger of joining with the WMF

It is very simple Will there are certain behaviours that legislation does not forbid, but just because legislation does not forbid it does not make it right. Example legislation does not forbid you from posting nude photos of an ex-partner, most people however think that to do so is a pretty shitty thing to do. City ordinances may not forbid you from pouring waste engine oil down the storm drains but once again most people would consider that not to be a neighbourly thing to do. Legislation may not sanction you if some one posts defamatory comments on a website you control, but most people would agree that not removing such and boasting about not doing so is a sucky sort of thing.

[wllm]

To be completely honest, I have no idea what you're trying to say above.

Not sure whether he is running with hare or hunting with the hounds. He can't do both and whilst he's trying to make up his mind on way or the other he is in danger of joining with the WMF

It is very simple Will there are certain behaviours that legislation does not forbid, but just because legislation does not forbid it does not make it right. Example legislation does not forbid you from posting nude photos of an ex-partner, most people however think that to do so is a pretty shitty thing to do. City ordinances may not forbid you from pouring waste engine oil down the storm drains but once again most people would consider that not to be a neighbourly thing to do. Legislation may not sanction you if some one posts defamatory comments on a website you control, but most people would agree that not removing such and boasting about not doing so is a sucky sort of thing.

Once again, in the battle between "us" and "them," I am unwaveringly loyal to one side: "me."

I'm part of WO, but will not fight in any battle with WP or the WMF. Likewise, I'm part of WP, but will not do anything to undermine the WO. Like others have mentioned, none of us can easily be lumped in to one camp or another. IMO, most of the people reading this have a lot to offer the Wikipedia community precisely because of their unique talents. I'd even go so far as to say that WP is lucky to have people like Greg; even if he never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I personally thank him for that. There are many others here that have held WP up to a mirror, and I hope you don't quit. AFAICS, WP needs you to continue to provide checks and balances, even if it sometimes seems like you're not making much headway.

Excelsior!

[SB_Johnny]

Once again, in the battle between "us" and "them," I am unwaveringly loyal to one side: "me."

So you're in it for yourself. Cool!

I'm part of WO, but will not fight in any battle with WP or the WMF. Likewise, I'm part of WP, but will not do anything to undermine the WO.

Ah, we see. You mean us no harm! Good to know.

Like others have mentioned, none of us can easily be lumped in to one camp or another.

Well, you can be lumped into your own camp, it seems. Ah, clarity is great!

IMO, most of the people reading this have a lot to offer the Wikipedia community precisely because of their unique talents. I'd even go so far as to say that WP is lucky to have people like Greg; even if he never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I personally thank him for that. There are many others here that have held WP up to a mirror, and I hope you don't quit. AFAICS, WP needs you to continue to provide checks and balances, even if it sometimes seems like you're not making much headway.

I can't even begin to express how flattered I feel. I also appreciate how you name-checked Greg, who is an excellent and upstanding man who the Wikipedian conspiracy-theorists believe is the man in charge here. Bravo!

(And here I was thinking perhaps I was too harsh earlier. Sheesh.)

[Zoloft]

A detailed explanation of wllm's post.

[wllm]

I guess it just takes a while for people to get to know each other, and I'm the new guy here. While we're getting to know one another, I'm gonna get back on topic, do a bit more reading and less writing to see what you guys are all about, and try to get a better handle on Commons. I'll send out the compiled list when I get a chance. When I'm not writing here, you can keep up with me on WP and wllm.com. My email is wllm@wllm.com; feel free to write me whenever.

FWIW, no one at the WMF understands why I'm here any better than any of you, including Lila. Maybe I should take a hint already. . .

,Wil

[wllm]

I don't mean to sound like a pessimist here but you are asking for 5 pounds of information to be crammed into a 3 pound bag and the items we have covered so far are still not all inclusive and mostly pertain to just the problems of Wikipedia. We haven't really even strayed into the porn collection of commons, the waste of time that is Wikiversity, WikiVoyage or Wikinews. Additionally, a lot of the problems aren't technical they are cultural and have been manifested through years of discussions, manipulation and abuse. It took a long time for the problems on Wikipedia to get where they are and it will take time to undo them (and a lot of painful decisions). Frankly, and I hold out hope I am wrong, I just don't see most if any of these things changing unless the WMF makes the decision to change their mentality of hands off. The can still be a non profit and have some control.

Please go in to more detail on the issues you mentioned if you think they belong in the list. There is no limit on the length of the list whatsoever.

[SB_Johnny]

FWIW, no one at the WMF understands why I'm here any better than any of you, including Lila. Maybe I should take a hint already. . .

Nah, you're doing fine. If common sense has anything to do with it perhaps they'll appoint you as the next spokesman between the developers and the people who actually work on the wiki. There's seriously bad blood there.

[thekohser]

...WP is lucky to have people like Greg; even if he never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I personally thank him for that.

That's going to look great in the "Cheers" section of my wiki BLP.

[lilburne]

To be completely honest, I have no idea what you're trying to say above.

Not sure whether he is running with hare or hunting with the hounds. He can't do both and whilst he's trying to make up his mind on way or the other he is in danger of joining with the WMF

It is very simple Will there are certain behaviours that legislation does not forbid, but just because legislation does not forbid it does not make it right. Example legislation does not forbid you from posting nude photos of an ex-partner, most people however think that to do so is a pretty shitty thing to do. City ordinances may not forbid you from pouring waste engine oil down the storm drains but once again most people would consider that not to be a neighbourly thing to do. Legislation may not sanction you if some one posts defamatory comments on a website you control, but most people would agree that not removing such and boasting about not doing so is a sucky sort of thing.

Once again, in the battle between "us" and "them," I am unwaveringly loyal to one side: "me."

Why, on an site that proclaims to be educational, would you allow a bunch of Western kids to determine how many and which images in an article on Mohamed are non-offensive? Or take the issue of child protection, why wouldn't an organisation do more than is absolutely legally necessary to protect children, many of whom are Autistic, or have other cognitive issues? Why would they not deal with issues of child protection by trained employees rather than by untrained volunteers? Again why would you let the user-base decide on whether a 13 yo should be part of a pornography group, why would you allow a 15 yo to be categorising Cock and Ball Torture images?

On each of the above the community will cry NOTCENSORED which is a shibboleth that overrides all other considerations. It is ideological and the WMF in not taking or enforcing any contrary position is aligned with that ideology.

[Textnyymi]

Wil, what do you think about Robert Michels' Iron Law Of Oligarchy? http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/germany/sp000711.txt

Do you think it may be the overarching rule at Wikimedia, since there's a very large community, but only a few seem to take up decisions and make plans, either because others refuse to act or because the status quo suits them?

The refusal to act on some pressing problems does seem to point at the fact that the "leaders", elected by a base of people or not, are now more concerned with keeping the whole structure together as long as it continues to protect their perceived power. Every one of them is thinking "me".

Does your partner want to act?

Do you have the Wil to Act?

[Kumioko]

I don't mean to sound like a pessimist here but you are asking for 5 pounds of information to be crammed into a 3 pound bag and the items we have covered so far are still not all inclusive and mostly pertain to just the problems of Wikipedia. We haven't really even strayed into the porn collection of commons, the waste of time that is Wikiversity, WikiVoyage or Wikinews. Additionally, a lot of the problems aren't technical they are cultural and have been manifested through years of discussions, manipulation and abuse. It took a long time for the problems on Wikipedia to get where they are and it will take time to undo them (and a lot of painful decisions). Frankly, and I hold out hope I am wrong, I just don't see most if any of these things changing unless the WMF makes the decision to change their mentality of hands off. The can still be a non profit and have some control.

Please go in to more detail on the issues you mentioned if you think they belong in the list. There is no limit on the length of the list whatsoever.

Not to sound like an ass, but whats the point? Youve already told us theres nothing you can or will do with it. So your basically telling me to waste my time.

[Triptych]

Not to sound like an ass, but whats the point? Youve already told us theres nothing you can or will do with it. So your basically telling me to waste my time.

Kumioko, with all you've been through with the abusive ban and Jimbo's full-throated endorsement (at 18:42, 18 May 2014 (UTC)) of the now-realized Arbcom threat to make a WP:AN/ANI-style complaint to your employer, it's understandable you're taking a pessimistic viewpoint of things. But I think Wil's been polite and constructive in assembling and reading up on his list, so you might be wrong nothing would come of it.

What he has said is he's not here on behalf of Lila (and in case you missed it, she said the same thing in her IRC chat day before last). That doesn't mean he won't do anything with it.

If I've read the thread correctly though, he's not looking for huge walls of text expounding on pick-an-issue, rather he's looking for more-easily digestible conceptual suggestions, each embodied in a paragraph or two. That he can then put on a list for his own consideration, whatever he's going to do with it. And you contributing a couple like if you like is not going to be a big time waster for you.

[wllm]

...WP is lucky to have people like Greg; even if he never directly contributes to WP going forward, we're all well aware that he's a very intelligent and eloquent individual with a knack for investigative reporting. He holds WP and the WMF to their word, and I personally thank him for that.

That's going to look great in the "Cheers" section of my wiki BLP.

Could you link my name to my Meta user page in the quote attribution? That way, if anyone wants to give me feedback on the quote, they won't have to waste any time looking me up.

[Kumioko]

I don't mean to sound like a pessimist here but you are asking for 5 pounds of information to be crammed into a 3 pound bag and the items we have covered so far are still not all inclusive and mostly pertain to just the problems of Wikipedia. We haven't really even strayed into the porn collection of commons, the waste of time that is Wikiversity, WikiVoyage or Wikinews. Additionally, a lot of the problems aren't technical they are cultural and have been manifested through years of discussions, manipulation and abuse. It took a long time for the problems on Wikipedia to get where they are and it will take time to undo them (and a lot of painful decisions). Frankly, and I hold out hope I am wrong, I just don't see most if any of these things changing unless the WMF makes the decision to change their mentality of hands off. The can still be a non profit and have some control.

Please go in to more detail on the issues you mentioned if you think they belong in the list. There is no limit on the length of the list whatsoever.

Wil, let me apologize for my pessimistic comment earlier. As Tryptich's well reasoned response and accurate response suggests I am still licking my wounds from a series of recent attacks by editors and Arbcomians. As you requested here are some more details.

One of Wikipedia's core problems as we all know is a lack of editors. This is due to a variety of things, not the least of which is an increasing number of Wikimedia apps no one, or very few, use. Wikiversity, Wikinews and Wikivoyage are all examples of those. These draw assets and manpower away from teh core wikipedia project and offer very little return. These all BTW have been covered in other topic threads on this venue as well as on Wikiedia and the individual wiki's themsevles. As with any business, when things start decreasing cuts need to be made so resources can be refocused on building the core product or business (for lack of a better example). Wikinews has very little activity and very little readership. Its a waste of time. Wikiversity has ben a failure for a long time and it needs to be cut loose. Wikivoyage is a little different. It was essentially a takeover of another Wiki type site, and since it has been going really didn't take off like the original. Sure people work on it and some use it, but its really just a distraction and a waste of resources. It provides little value IMO to the goal of knowledge building for the foundation.

As for the cultural problems, I could write for the next three weeks and still not cover everything. Part of the problems are as follows and many stem from the problems within the admin corps:
- The WMF's attitude towards the editors and volunteer: The WMF thinks that can do anything they want and often do. They release poorly designed changes that aren't thought out onto a community that didn't ask for them and doesn't want them. Then the WMF doesn't get involved in things they do need to fix, mostly because they aren't interesting or exciting to the dev's.
- The Volunteers attitude towards the WMF: Most of hte volunteers feel the WMF needs to work with the community more and start working with them on changes instead of forcing changes on them.
- The admins attitude towards editors: A lot of admins feel editors are beneath them and treat them like second and third class citizens and not to be trusted.
- Editors attitude towards admins: Most editors either drink the Koolaid and want to be admins, so they don't rock the boat, or they get burned by some abusive admin and it forever affter ruins their experince with the project.
- Admins being exempted from policy and allowed free rein to do what they want with no oversight: Admins know that its nearly impossible to have the tools removed so they have free roam to do whatever they want. Most of hte rules (including the new privacy policy BTW) completely exempt admins from them.
- The WMF's lack of interferance or oversight of the problems ith Wikipedia and other WMF sites: Already covered somewhat above, but instead of helping to fix the problems that continue to erode the site, the WMF keeps a hands off approach. Sure they don't need to edit, but they can and should have a hand in policy and making sure that Arbcom and abusive admins be held to task. When they pull the kind of crap they did with me, contacting employers and making legal threats, that is when the WMF needs to grow some balls (Luis of Legal I am talking to you), step in and beat some sense into the admins and Arbs. If they don't want to follow policy then the WMF needs to mind the store and remove the tools from them.
- The attitude that the admin is always right:Another cultural fallacy that just because the admin says it, it must be right. There are about 1400 admins from all over the world with different backgrounds, education levels, ages, experience, cultural beliefs, etc. The argument that any admin can use their own discretion, broadly construed, to decide on problems, is a major part of the problem. I shouldn't need to explain why but mathematically. 1400 * individual discretion/wide array of beliefs = Problems
- Admin for life: Nuff said about this. Its self explanatory
- Adminship is too hard to get and too hard to take away:Adminship is so hard to get, most people don't want to endure it once, let alone multiple times. Its known as the gauntlet and a meat grinder. People have gone through it and have never been heard from again. Because of this, they make the tools extremely hard to remove and of course only the Arbcom, a group of admins, can be trusted with such awesome responsibily.
- Too much work for too few people: With the decreasing pool of people and increasing number of editors who are shit out the meatgrinder, a lot have come back as vandals and trolls and sockmasters. Add to this the tasks, many of which are unnecessary BTW, that Wikipedia requires be done by admins only, adds a alot of stress because these areas back log and some now are months or even years long with no end in sight.
- The antisocial personalities that are attracted to eid in the first place are a big part of the antisocial atmosphere. Nerds don't like people. They like computers and get beat up by social people. So they stay safe in their basements in front of their laptops with reruns of Stargate SG1 and a steady supply of Mountain Dew and redbull. These are not people people, yet they are the community at large of Wikipedia.

[TungstenCarbide]

... One of Wikipedia's core problems as we all know is a lack of editors. This is due to a variety of things, not the least of which is an increasing number of Wikimedia apps no one, or very few, use. Wikiversity, Wikinews and Wikivoyage are all examples of those. These draw assets and manpower away from teh core wikipedia project and offer very little return. These all BTW have been covered in other topic threads on this venue as well as on Wikiedia and the individual wiki's themsevles. As with any business, when things start decreasing cuts need to be made so resources can be refocused on building the core product or business (for lack of a better example). Wikinews has very little activity and very little readership. Its a waste of time. Wikiversity has ben a failure for a long time and it needs to be cut loose. Wikivoyage is a little different. It was essentially a takeover of another Wiki type site, and since it has been going really didn't take off like the original. Sure people work on it and some use it, but its really just a distraction and a waste of resources. It provides little value IMO to the goal of knowledge building for the foundation ...

How would you investigate whether or not this is true? Is there an easy way to look up the number of edits per day at these side projects and compare them to the number of Wikipedia's edits? And then look at the edits to see how many actually create content and how many are mindless drone grinding? Wikipedia has lost editors over the last seven years, but have these editors gone to the side projects? My gut instinct is that the side projects represent an insignificant bleed for the Wikipedia editor base. But that's not to say they shouldn't be re-evaluated from time to time and shut down if needed.

Falling editor ranks is certainly one of Wikipedia's problems, but the type of editors is an even bigger problem. Some of these characters make over a thousand edits per day grinding on templates or other stupid shit that doesn't matter.

[wllm]

Wil, let me apologize for my pessimistic comment earlier. As Tryptich's well reasoned response and accurate response suggests I am still licking my wounds from a series of recent attacks by editors and Arbcomians. As you requested here are some more details.

Kumioko, I'm not even sure you have anything to apologize for, but you leveled up in my respect for you by saying it. It never ceases to amaze me that, although everyone seems to understand that they aren't perfect, an extremely small fraction of the general population can and/or are willing to actually apologize for anything they say or do. People who apologize, forgive, and commit to honesty seem to form at most 1% of the population, and it is this small group of people that I hold in highest regard. Thanks for a breath of fresh air to start my day.

I don't have the same background info that most people here seem to have. Can you please send me your story in a PM?

As for what I can do, I think I can help most by continuing to ask questions- regardless of how inconvenient they may be. If the WMF is truly transparent and working in good faith, they will welcome these questions and any suggestions that anyone might offer on points of improvement that come up while answering them. Case in point, I looked over the view counts for the threads I've created; they seem to be relatively popular. By bringing some attention to the issues you guys are concerned about, I believe I'm working in both your interests and those of the WMF (although I'm not sure that everyone on either side fully appreciates that yet). People from both communities can choose to listen to me or not for whatever reason; it's entirely their prerogative. Either way, I'll still keep asking the questions.

Like I said before, the list that we compile can be used by anyone for any purpose. If one or more of you decide to send it to the ED of the WMF's public email address, it's entirely your prerogative.

I hope you guys are grokking where I'm coming from, but it will become clearer as time goes on in any case.

One of Wikipedia's core problems as we all know is a lack of editors. This is due to a variety of things, not the least of which is an increasing number of Wikimedia apps no one, or very few, use. Wikiversity, Wikinews and Wikivoyage are all examples of those. These draw assets and manpower away from teh core wikipedia project and offer very little return. These all BTW have been covered in other topic threads on this venue as well as on Wikiedia and the individual wiki's themsevles. As with any business, when things start decreasing cuts need to be made so resources can be refocused on building the core product or business (for lack of a better example). Wikinews has very little activity and very little readership. Its a waste of time. Wikiversity has ben a failure for a long time and it needs to be cut loose. Wikivoyage is a little different. It was essentially a takeover of another Wiki type site, and since it has been going really didn't take off like the original. Sure people work on it and some use it, but its really just a distraction and a waste of resources. It provides little value IMO to the goal of knowledge building for the foundation.

As for the cultural problems, I could write for the next three weeks and still not cover everything. Part of the problems are as follows and many stem from the problems within the admin corps:
- The WMF's attitude towards the editors and volunteer: The WMF thinks that can do anything they want and often do. They release poorly designed changes that aren't thought out onto a community that didn't ask for them and doesn't want them. Then the WMF doesn't get involved in things they do need to fix, mostly because they aren't interesting or exciting to the dev's.
- The Volunteers attitude towards the WMF: Most of hte volunteers feel the WMF needs to work with the community more and start working with them on changes instead of forcing changes on them.
- The admins attitude towards editors: A lot of admins feel editors are beneath them and treat them like second and third class citizens and not to be trusted.
- Editors attitude towards admins: Most editors either drink the Koolaid and want to be admins, so they don't rock the boat, or they get burned by some abusive admin and it forever affter ruins their experince with the project.
- Admins being exempted from policy and allowed free rein to do what they want with no oversight: Admins know that its nearly impossible to have the tools removed so they have free roam to do whatever they want. Most of hte rules (including the new privacy policy BTW) completely exempt admins from them.
- The WMF's lack of interferance or oversight of the problems ith Wikipedia and other WMF sites: Already covered somewhat above, but instead of helping to fix the problems that continue to erode the site, the WMF keeps a hands off approach. Sure they don't need to edit, but they can and should have a hand in policy and making sure that Arbcom and abusive admins be held to task. When they pull the kind of crap they did with me, contacting employers and making legal threats, that is when the WMF needs to grow some balls (Luis of Legal I am talking to you), step in and beat some sense into the admins and Arbs. If they don't want to follow policy then the WMF needs to mind the store and remove the tools from them.
- The attitude that the admin is always right:Another cultural fallacy that just because the admin says it, it must be right. There are about 1400 admins from all over the world with different backgrounds, education levels, ages, experience, cultural beliefs, etc. The argument that any admin can use their own discretion, broadly construed, to decide on problems, is a major part of the problem. I shouldn't need to explain why but mathematically. 1400 * individual discretion/wide array of beliefs = Problems
- Admin for life: Nuff said about this. Its self explanatory
- Adminship is too hard to get and too hard to take away:Adminship is so hard to get, most people don't want to endure it once, let alone multiple times. Its known as the gauntlet and a meat grinder. People have gone through it and have never been heard from again. Because of this, they make the tools extremely hard to remove and of course only the Arbcom, a group of admins, can be trusted with such awesome responsibily.
- Too much work for too few people: With the decreasing pool of people and increasing number of editors who are shit out the meatgrinder, a lot have come back as vandals and trolls and sockmasters. Add to this the tasks, many of which are unnecessary BTW, that Wikipedia requires be done by admins only, adds a alot of stress because these areas back log and some now are months or even years long with no end in sight.
- The antisocial personalities that are attracted to eid in the first place are a big part of the antisocial atmosphere. Nerds don't like people. They like computers and get beat up by social people. So they stay safe in their basements in front of their laptops with reruns of Stargate SG1 and a steady supply of Mountain Dew and redbull. These are not people people, yet they are the community at large of Wikipedia.

Someone mentioned shuttering the less popular projects earlier (it may have been you), so it's down on my draft of the list.

I asked for a wishlist of changes that the WMF could make for the good of the community. At the time, it did occur to me that it might be putting the cart before the horse by asking for solutions before identifying the problems, but a lot of solution-focussed people find lists of solutions much more digestible than lists of the problems themselves. Plus, you guys tend to handle ID'ing problem pretty well in practically every other thread. After we've hit a v1 with this list, it might make sense to add the above to a list of problems and see what's not addressed by the list consensus solutions. I'm familiar with most of these issues after reading Andreas' list of links and several WO blog posts, among other sources, but this is a good start to a breakout of individual problems.

[Vigilant]

Falling editor ranks is certainly one of Wikipedia's problems, but the type of editors is an even bigger problem. Some of these characters make over a thousand edits per day grinding on templates or other stupid shit that doesn't matter.

Category slotting, punctuation fixing (see hyphen vs emdash wars), infoboxes, reference formats, image uploads that nobody will ever look at or use...

Add to this entire swaths of articles that are just pointless to an actual encyclopedia.
Pokemon, D&D, minor sports figures, roads, anime, etc, etc
Strangely, this is where some of the fiercest fighting goes on.

You could pare down this encyclopedia by 50% and lose 1% of the readers.

[Kumioko]

... One of Wikipedia's core problems as we all know is a lack of editors. This is due to a variety of things, not the least of which is an increasing number of Wikimedia apps no one, or very few, use. Wikiversity, Wikinews and Wikivoyage are all examples of those. These draw assets and manpower away from teh core wikipedia project and offer very little return. These all BTW have been covered in other topic threads on this venue as well as on Wikiedia and the individual wiki's themsevles. As with any business, when things start decreasing cuts need to be made so resources can be refocused on building the core product or business (for lack of a better example). Wikinews has very little activity and very little readership. Its a waste of time. Wikiversity has ben a failure for a long time and it needs to be cut loose. Wikivoyage is a little different. It was essentially a takeover of another Wiki type site, and since it has been going really didn't take off like the original. Sure people work on it and some use it, but its really just a distraction and a waste of resources. It provides little value IMO to the goal of knowledge building for the foundation ...

How would you investigate whether or not this is true? Is there an easy way to look up the number of edits per day at these side projects and compare them to the number of Wikipedia's edits? And then look at the edits to see how many actually create content and how many are mindless drone grinding? Wikipedia has lost editors over the last seven years, but have these editors gone to the side projects? My gut instinct is that the side projects represent an insignificant bleed for the Wikipedia editor base. But that's not to say they shouldn't be re-evaluated from time to time and shut down if needed.

Falling editor ranks is certainly one of Wikipedia's problems, but the type of editors is an even bigger problem. Some of these characters make over a thousand edits per day grinding on templates or other stupid shit that doesn't matter.

A good question that frankly I don't readily have the answer too. I agree that editors are leaving for different reasons and I truthfully don't have any way to know how much resources these projects are taking away. A few things I would look at though would be:
- How many edits are being done to them
- What is the overlap in editorship. Which is to say, how many Wikipedia editors also edit these other projects.
- Its also important to find out how many are editing these proejts that do not edit wikipedia (as far as we know)
- What is the cost for maintaining the infrastructuer (servers, harddrive space, bandwidth, etc.)
- Where there associated drops in editing when these other projects came on line and inversely did Wikipedia see a pattern increase when these projects came online

I also disagree somewhat with the statement that minor edits don't matter. My dad used to say if you watch the pennies, the dollars will mind themselves. So to me, people hacking away at minor edits, if that's what interests them, allows others who want to create articles to do so without being distracted by the insignificant things.

[Vigilant]

Wil,

Everyone of any honesty on both sites knows what the problems are.
We've been over and over and over this.

The WMF can't be seen to be taking advice, even fairly given, from the Dark Side.
Even were these policy ideas arrived at internally and independent of The Sith Lords, there exist senior entrenched members of "Teh Communitah" who have historically stood in the way of even the most modest of changes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... _proposals

Lila has a once in a generation chance to make wikipedia and the WMF vastly less broken.
She just have to have the strength of her convictions.