please remove my moderating bits

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

please remove my moderating bits

Walter van Kalken
I have been thinking it over and decided to face reality. I have lost
all my believe in the wikimediaprojects. So much even that I am now
adding content to places outside of the wikimediaprojects instead of
having to deal with all the 100000000000000's of procedures and rules
being implemented by people who do not even know how to write an article.

The projects have been taken over by a group of people, mostly
teenagers, whom apparently have lost all sight of realism and have taken
other people's work hostage, without creating one bit of content
themselves. Who feel that adding templates, writing rules and policing
(the process) is more important than what we set out to do. Also there
is a very very very strong western bias in the projects. Ideas and
processes are launched which might work perfectly in a western world
(like the rules for verification) but which fall flat on their face when
applied to non-western items. When someone actually rises this point on
the lists (me) it is ignored.

Also Jimbo's statement that en: wikipedia has covered most subjects
disappoints me. This might be true for subjects on developed countries.
But the projects are heavily lacking in the same sort of content with
regards to the developing world. While every lake in the US probably has
an article. Most Asian / African / South American countries have barely
got articles describing these kind of features. And if someone does
write an article about it, it gets deleted as non-encyclopedic. Also
wikipedia's become very nationalistic like the nl: wikipedia where a
fairly large group feels non-Dutch and non-Belgian topics should not be
covered in the Dutch language edition! And they actually wrote rules to
enforce this.

The amount of people who only care about their own backyard (the west)
and wanna delete everything they do not understand has grown to big.
Also other idiocism like on nl: wikipedia where procedure is 100x more
important than the smooth running of the project, resulting in an
everyone can insult everyone situation and no-one get's actually blocked
is taking to much time and stress.

Jimbo invented the wheel with the wikimedia projects. Unfortunately the
wheel never evolved, nor will it in the current climate. Every form of
progress of the projects in something meaningfull and working gets
blocked or grinded in bureaucracy by a group of people who want to be
the boss.

Meanwhile on the boardlevel politicians rule who only give a shit about
themselves and about political games. I have seen many of these games
played out over the years. Also the projects diversify to much and to
much new niches where new small groups start that take their particular
niche hostage (commons being a prime example) are started. Instead of
looking at how things can co-operate people start their own new kingdoms
and fiefdoms (like wikitionaryz, which is GerardM's fiefdom) into things
that are not our core imho. We are about creating content, not spreading
it, let other people do that job.

On some projects I still have moderating bits, I hereby ask the stewards
to take these bits away as I do not wish to spend to much time anymore
on the projects, I might shout a bit from the sideline. The wikimedia
projects will always exist, and the original idea was great.
Unfortunately Winston Churchill was right .... democracy works in theory
only. When the masses take over like on our project, the sum gets
lowered to the level of the masses. Which means herd thinking.

Waerth
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

SJ-5
Waerth,

I am very sorry to read this.  When you make noise on the foundation
list, for instance, even if it is a bit too much noise, you are not
ignored.  Your comments about verification are a good example...
sometimes it is just hard to answer effectively.

I agree that projects should look more towards cooperation with others
-- other languages and other types of projects.  You are right that
lack of cooperation is a problem.  En:wp has a policy as of this year
not to allow usernames with non-latin character sets. I have no idea
where that came from, but it is a shame.  But this is nothing new --
if I recall correctly, wiktionary was started thanks to division and
bickering about what belongs in an encyclopedia, not solely thanks to
a desire to have separate useful projects...

I hope you will eventually come to have more faith in the long-term
process of rule development, and the long-term motivations of
wikimedians... and that you will still shout, from the sidelines or
the field.

SJ

On 10/25/06, Walter van Kalken <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have been thinking it over and decided to face reality. I have lost
> all my believe in the wikimediaprojects. So much even that I am now
> adding content to places outside of the wikimediaprojects instead of
> having to deal with all the 100000000000000's of procedures and rules
> being implemented by people who do not even know how to write an article.
>
> The projects have been taken over by a group of people, mostly
> teenagers, whom apparently have lost all sight of realism and have taken
> other people's work hostage, without creating one bit of content
> themselves. Who feel that adding templates, writing rules and policing
> (the process) is more important than what we set out to do. Also there
> is a very very very strong western bias in the projects. Ideas and
> processes are launched which might work perfectly in a western world
> (like the rules for verification) but which fall flat on their face when
> applied to non-western items. When someone actually rises this point on
> the lists (me) it is ignored.
>
> Also Jimbo's statement that en: wikipedia has covered most subjects
> disappoints me. This might be true for subjects on developed countries.
> But the projects are heavily lacking in the same sort of content with
> regards to the developing world. While every lake in the US probably has
> an article. Most Asian / African / South American countries have barely
> got articles describing these kind of features. And if someone does
> write an article about it, it gets deleted as non-encyclopedic. Also
> wikipedia's become very nationalistic like the nl: wikipedia where a
> fairly large group feels non-Dutch and non-Belgian topics should not be
> covered in the Dutch language edition! And they actually wrote rules to
> enforce this.
>
> The amount of people who only care about their own backyard (the west)
> and wanna delete everything they do not understand has grown to big.
> Also other idiocism like on nl: wikipedia where procedure is 100x more
> important than the smooth running of the project, resulting in an
> everyone can insult everyone situation and no-one get's actually blocked
> is taking to much time and stress.
>
> Jimbo invented the wheel with the wikimedia projects. Unfortunately the
> wheel never evolved, nor will it in the current climate. Every form of
> progress of the projects in something meaningfull and working gets
> blocked or grinded in bureaucracy by a group of people who want to be
> the boss.
>
> Meanwhile on the boardlevel politicians rule who only give a shit about
> themselves and about political games. I have seen many of these games
> played out over the years. Also the projects diversify to much and to
> much new niches where new small groups start that take their particular
> niche hostage (commons being a prime example) are started. Instead of
> looking at how things can co-operate people start their own new kingdoms
> and fiefdoms (like wikitionaryz, which is GerardM's fiefdom) into things
> that are not our core imho. We are about creating content, not spreading
> it, let other people do that job.
>
> On some projects I still have moderating bits, I hereby ask the stewards
> to take these bits away as I do not wish to spend to much time anymore
> on the projects, I might shout a bit from the sideline. The wikimedia
> projects will always exist, and the original idea was great.
> Unfortunately Winston Churchill was right .... democracy works in theory
> only. When the masses take over like on our project, the sum gets
> lowered to the level of the masses. Which means herd thinking.
>
> Waerth
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


--
++SJ
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

oscar-11
In reply to this post by Walter van Kalken
On 10/25/06, Walter van Kalken <[hidden email]> wrote:
<snip>

On some projects I still have moderating bits, I hereby ask the stewards
> to take these bits away as I do not wish to spend to much time anymore
> on the projects, I might shout a bit from the sideline.


dear waerth,

{{done}} - lemme know if i forgot something?)
looking forward to hearing from you again at some time, be it shouting from
the sideline to the wikimedians, irl in bangkok (since it's the way from
europe to taipeh) or on tv perhaps, or talking on skype?
keep heart and i do hope your actor's career will further develop as well as
it has so far i gather.

all the best and greetings,
oscar
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

KIZU Naoko
In reply to this post by SJ-5
Waerth,
I am sorry to see you in trouble. I would like you to remind people
tend to hesitate to express their reaction for several reasons.
Complexity of problems, feeling as outsiders (in the view of mentioned
issues) and so on. And as SJ pointed out, even if you have received
not so many responces as you would have expected, your postings to
foundation-l hasn't been completely ignored.

On 10/25/06, SJ <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree that projects should look more towards cooperation with others
> -- other languages and other types of projects.  You are right that
> lack of cooperation is a problem.

Sure, I would like to add it could happen even if all involved parties
are on a good faith. One can be ethnocentric and still on a good
faith; good faith based on unproper idea can cause disasterous end,
that is a moral of history. And we won't always know what our deeds
fruit.

> En:wp has a policy as of this year
> not to allow usernames with non-latin character sets. I have no idea
> where that came from, but it is a shame.

It could be forseeable though, my complaint about its cultural
centricism and disrespect for non Western culture that was simply
rejected because they allowed us non Westerners still to edit on that
project, so it was not discriminative. I think I heard similar
statements once somewhere else in documents in the age of colonialism,
and it is for me enough to decide to leave it.

Also, I am very shocked no one didn't alert us about that when we were
going to reject vote eligiblity to the people who were blocked
indefinitely from somewhere else. There were, in fact, people who
shouldn't be treated as such, since their guilty of banning was only
they used their usernames in their own scripts. Fortunately or
unfortunately I haven't seen votes from such people as Election
Official; so now I fear if we Election Officials sent a wrong sign for
those people who had accepted such sanctions and didn't oppose.

On the other hand, English Wikipedians seem not to feel guilty to
block trusted people of Wikimedia project only in the reason they
didn't prefer their usernames. That is a surprise for me and I would
like to say there are fearing SUL would bring them their current
policy to apply all the project.  As past Election Official, I stress
the coming change should encourage "one user, one account" policy - or
the next Election cannot be feasable. Even in this year, hand counting
was a stressful nightmare. And the English Wikipedia policy would be
an obstacle to ensure such a policy unless it will be changed.

I expect English Wikipedians change their mind and become aware
Wikipedia project consists in diversity, and also I expect such kind
of ethnocentrism is only a phenomenon on English Wikipedia and not on
other English projects.

--
Kizu Naoko
  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
  * Nessuna poesia prima di noi *
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

James Hare
In reply to this post by Walter van Kalken
Walter, all I can say is, this situation isn't going to get better by you
going away. You need to fight for the good cause and get the idiots (I'm not
mentioning names because I don't know any) to go away.

On 10/25/06, Walter van Kalken <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I have been thinking it over and decided to face reality. I have lost
> all my believe in the wikimediaprojects. So much even that I am now
> adding content to places outside of the wikimediaprojects instead of
> having to deal with all the 100000000000000's of procedures and rules
> being implemented by people who do not even know how to write an article.
>
> The projects have been taken over by a group of people, mostly
> teenagers, whom apparently have lost all sight of realism and have taken
> other people's work hostage, without creating one bit of content
> themselves. Who feel that adding templates, writing rules and policing
> (the process) is more important than what we set out to do. Also there
> is a very very very strong western bias in the projects. Ideas and
> processes are launched which might work perfectly in a western world
> (like the rules for verification) but which fall flat on their face when
> applied to non-western items. When someone actually rises this point on
> the lists (me) it is ignored.
>
> Also Jimbo's statement that en: wikipedia has covered most subjects
> disappoints me. This might be true for subjects on developed countries.
> But the projects are heavily lacking in the same sort of content with
> regards to the developing world. While every lake in the US probably has
> an article. Most Asian / African / South American countries have barely
> got articles describing these kind of features. And if someone does
> write an article about it, it gets deleted as non-encyclopedic. Also
> wikipedia's become very nationalistic like the nl: wikipedia where a
> fairly large group feels non-Dutch and non-Belgian topics should not be
> covered in the Dutch language edition! And they actually wrote rules to
> enforce this.
>
> The amount of people who only care about their own backyard (the west)
> and wanna delete everything they do not understand has grown to big.
> Also other idiocism like on nl: wikipedia where procedure is 100x more
> important than the smooth running of the project, resulting in an
> everyone can insult everyone situation and no-one get's actually blocked
> is taking to much time and stress.
>
> Jimbo invented the wheel with the wikimedia projects. Unfortunately the
> wheel never evolved, nor will it in the current climate. Every form of
> progress of the projects in something meaningfull and working gets
> blocked or grinded in bureaucracy by a group of people who want to be
> the boss.
>
> Meanwhile on the boardlevel politicians rule who only give a shit about
> themselves and about political games. I have seen many of these games
> played out over the years. Also the projects diversify to much and to
> much new niches where new small groups start that take their particular
> niche hostage (commons being a prime example) are started. Instead of
> looking at how things can co-operate people start their own new kingdoms
> and fiefdoms (like wikitionaryz, which is GerardM's fiefdom) into things
> that are not our core imho. We are about creating content, not spreading
> it, let other people do that job.
>
> On some projects I still have moderating bits, I hereby ask the stewards
> to take these bits away as I do not wish to spend to much time anymore
> on the projects, I might shout a bit from the sideline. The wikimedia
> projects will always exist, and the original idea was great.
> Unfortunately Winston Churchill was right .... democracy works in theory
> only. When the masses take over like on our project, the sum gets
> lowered to the level of the masses. Which means herd thinking.
>
> Waerth
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

Andre Engels
In reply to this post by SJ-5
2006/10/25, SJ <[hidden email]>:

> I agree that projects should look more towards cooperation with others
> -- other languages and other types of projects.  You are right that
> lack of cooperation is a problem.  En:wp has a policy as of this year
> not to allow usernames with non-latin character sets. I have no idea
> where that came from, but it is a shame.
>

This feels like an awfully bad decision, in particular once single login has
been created. I would like to strongly ask the English Wikipedia to
reconsider this decision when single login comes out, if not before.

--
Andre Engels, [hidden email]
ICQ: 6260644  --  Skype: a_engels
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

geni
In reply to this post by SJ-5
On 10/25/06, SJ <[hidden email]> wrote:
> En:wp has a policy as of this year
> not to allow usernames with non-latin character sets. I have no idea
> where that came from, but it is a shame.


I don't follow username policy but it is likely to do with issues
related to certain cyrillic characters (ie they look like latin
characters).

--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

Neil Harris-2
geni wrote:

> On 10/25/06, SJ <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> En:wp has a policy as of this year
>> not to allow usernames with non-latin character sets. I have no idea
>> where that came from, but it is a shame.
>>    
>
>
> I don't follow username policy but it is likely to do with issues
> related to certain cyrillic characters (ie they look like latin
> characters).
>
>  
That problem's now fixed.

The visual resemblances of Latin, Greek and Cyrillic characters are
taken into account by the software when comparing new usernames against
already-registered usernames.

In addition, mixing script systems within a single username is now
forbidden.

However, the remaining problem, which is that most Latin-script readers
can't easily discern the differences between names in radically
different writing systems (and indeed, in many cases, that such names
cannot be displayed at all in their browsers) is still a major issue,
and one that will need addressing when single-sign-in is fully implemented.

One possibility is the automatic transliteration of names when used in
wikis whose "home script" is different; another is allowing users to
create their own disambiguating pseudonyms for use on wikis with
different default writing systems, so that their names might, for
example, be represented as "???? (Xiao Zhou)", where "????" stands for
Unicoded Chinese characters which are not readable by most westerners.

Any such disambiguating pseudonyms would, of course, also need to be
unique within the same namespace as ordinary usernames.

-- Neil

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

geni
On 10/25/06, Neil Harris <[hidden email]> wrote:
> However, the remaining problem, which is that most Latin-script readers
> can't easily discern the differences between names in radically
> different writing systems (and indeed, in many cases, that such names
> cannot be displayed at all in their browsers) is still a major issue,
> and one that will need addressing when single-sign-in is fully implemented.
>

People could always just click the name and check the contributions
and the like (hey I'm dyslexic I have to do that anyway).


--
geni
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: please remove my moderating bits

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by James Hare
A valid point.  It is only natural for sane editors to avoid swimming in
piranha infested waters.  This has the unfortunate effect of creating
circumstances  in which idiots can breed like <s>rabids</s> rabbits.
Ec


James Hare wrote:

>Walter, all I can say is, this situation isn't going to get better by you
>going away. You need to fight for the good cause and get the idiots (I'm not
>mentioning names because I don't know any) to go away.
>
>On 10/25/06, Walter van Kalken <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>>I have been thinking it over and decided to face reality. I have lost
>>all my believe in the wikimediaprojects. So much even that I am now
>>adding content to places outside of the wikimediaprojects instead of
>>having to deal with all the 100000000000000's of procedures and rules
>>being implemented by people who do not even know how to write an article.
>><snip>
>>    
>>


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l