5 ms·
Never thought I'd see WP talk pages held up as an example of civility. They certainly weren't when I was there. AN/I, ArbCom, flame wars a plenty.
by redthrowaway 10y ago
Never thought I'd see WP talk pages held up as an example of civility. They certainly weren't when I was there. AN/I, ArbCom, flame wars a plenty.
- FireBeyond 10y agoAnd the civility is definitely oftentimes a facade thereof. Quoting rules, policies, passive aggressive civility was the norm, rather than sincere attempts at compromise.
- makomk 10y agoYeah. The "assume good faith" policy in particular has always been a favourite weapon of skilled edit warriors and flamers, for obvious reasons.
- Analemma_ 10y agoSeriously. I gave up editing Wikipedia a long time ago after one too many of my good-faith edits were reverted by some random busybody citing WP:OMGWTFBBQ. It was done in an ostensibly polite way but the passive-aggressive "fuck you, go away" was very clear. I eventually just gave up because it wasn't very important to me, but I don't think that model can successfully transfer to society writ large.
- EazyC 10y agoI had the very same exact experience. It is astounding to me that there are no legitimate competitors to Wikipedia at all after 15 years. It's funny how social networking is such a competitive space from facebook --> instagram --> snapchat etc but it's still just Wikipedia --> Wikipedia --> Wikipedia
- oblio 10y agoWhat money is there to be made from an online encyclopedia? Selling ads? :)
- notahacker 10y agoThere's a few people doing this with Wikipedia content anyway, of course, not to mention the content farms geared towards search queries, which just makes the competitive space for a raise VC-capital to invest a lot of time and effort into making an ad-supported traditional encyclopedia that's actually good seem even less attractive
- chris_wot 10y agoThose quoting rules often used shortcut wikilinks to pol View and guidelines they have never read, much less understood.