3 ms·

Well, I'm not trying to deny your experience, but that's a different thing, isn't it? The fact is many admins active today were voted in around 2007-2008 when

by tux3 8y ago

Well, I'm not trying to deny your experience, but that's a different thing, isn't it? The fact is many admins active today were voted in around 2007-2008 when the standards were much more lax, and because the process is so hard to go through fewer admins are elected these days. I'm just a normal user myself, and sadly I don't have any good answer to that, the best one can do is participate and try to change things for the better. At the core of it, these are all just people gathering around a common goal.

chris_wot 8y ago
No, it’s not. I wrote neutrally and sourced my material about a controversial figure and was pursued (wikistalked) by a user who doesn’t make substantial contributions other than page patrol. In fact, my article remains roughly the same, but is only half of what I was trying to make it because of what they did to me. I’m a hugely experienced editor who was researching the topic openly and transparently but was accused of an agenda because I showed my sources in the talk page of the article. I complained on ANI and asked for help, but it was shutdown and nobody has ever reviewed the abuse I suffered from the other parties. Those other parties actively canvased on another board, and didn’t bother communicating with me. Then one of the editors actively changed the archives of the talk page of the article I was working on to auto archive in a few days and once all my talk discussions rapidly expired restored the default archive timeframe. Totally got away with it too! Don’t think for a moment that most admins know what they are doing. They can’t, the topics are too broad and the agendas can often be opaque.
- JdeBP 8y ago
  You didn't complain on AN/I. You complained on the 3-revert-rule violation (now Edit Warring) noticeboard, and failed to even mention the edit warring that the noticeboard is about. Again, it's errors like this, and mis-labelling people as Wikipedia administrators when they are not and never have been, that undermine the credibility of this account of events.
  - chris_wot 8y ago
    Except that I did, multiple times. You need to stop telling me I'm misremembering things that can be easily verified in the history. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Letsbefiends&namespace=4&tagfilter=&start=&end= https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%... And I never claimed that all the people involved are Wikipedia admins. In fact, I specifically didn't say any names. You will also note that I didn't initiate the edit warring notification.
    - JdeBP 8y ago
      Ahem! * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=720686762 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Adminis...
      - chris_wot 8y ago
        "You didn't complain on ANI" And yet I did. And I never said I didn't complain on that other board. In fact, if I recall correctly (and on this point, my memory may not be 100% correct, but you have raised this...) it wasn't me who initiated the notice, but I did respond. What is your point? You are the one telling me I never took it to ANI. In the end, I was clearly not in my right mind. I started having suicidal thoughts, and I did indeed edit as an IP address but not to evade any blocks. I accept that this was not wise, but in my own defense, I was in a heightened state of anxiety and unwell. After the whole debacle, I left Wikipedia and never came back. It is remarkable that I didn't mention who I was, yet you know specific revisions from an IP address. Who exactly are you?
        JdeBP 8y ago
        It's not that remarkable. You have recounted this hole-filled tale before here on Hacker News. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11795753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11795753 And mentioned it several times since. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17111646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17111646 * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13498494 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13498494
Retric 8y ago
The appropriate response is to kick some of these people out not simply accept that their is nothing to be done.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- ethbro 8y ago
  Exactly. Avoidance of repercussions for people in positions of authority because of tenure is a steep slippery slope to hell.

by tux3 8y ago

chris_wot 8y ago

No, it’s not. I wrote neutrally and sourced my material about a controversial figure and was pursued (wikistalked) by a user who doesn’t make substantial contributions other than page patrol. In fact, my article remains roughly the same, but is only half of what I was trying to make it because of what they did to me. I’m a hugely experienced editor who was researching the topic openly and transparently but was accused of an agenda because I showed my sources in the talk page of the article. I complained on ANI and asked for help, but it was shutdown and nobody has ever reviewed the abuse I suffered from the other parties. Those other parties actively canvased on another board, and didn’t bother communicating with me. Then one of the editors actively changed the archives of the talk page of the article I was working on to auto archive in a few days and once all my talk discussions rapidly expired restored the default archive timeframe. Totally got away with it too! Don’t think for a moment that most admins know what they are doing. They can’t, the topics are too broad and the agendas can often be opaque.

JdeBP 8y ago
You didn't complain on AN/I. You complained on the 3-revert-rule violation (now Edit Warring) noticeboard, and failed to even mention the edit warring that the noticeboard is about. Again, it's errors like this, and mis-labelling people as Wikipedia administrators when they are not and never have been, that undermine the credibility of this account of events.
- chris_wot 8y ago
  Except that I did, multiple times. You need to stop telling me I'm misremembering things that can be easily verified in the history. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Letsbefiends&namespace=4&tagfilter=&start=&end= https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%... And I never claimed that all the people involved are Wikipedia admins. In fact, I specifically didn't say any names. You will also note that I didn't initiate the edit warring notification.
  - JdeBP 8y ago
    Ahem! * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=720686762 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Adminis...
    - chris_wot 8y ago
      "You didn't complain on ANI" And yet I did. And I never said I didn't complain on that other board. In fact, if I recall correctly (and on this point, my memory may not be 100% correct, but you have raised this...) it wasn't me who initiated the notice, but I did respond. What is your point? You are the one telling me I never took it to ANI. In the end, I was clearly not in my right mind. I started having suicidal thoughts, and I did indeed edit as an IP address but not to evade any blocks. I accept that this was not wise, but in my own defense, I was in a heightened state of anxiety and unwell. After the whole debacle, I left Wikipedia and never came back. It is remarkable that I didn't mention who I was, yet you know specific revisions from an IP address. Who exactly are you?
      - JdeBP 8y ago
        It's not that remarkable. You have recounted this hole-filled tale before here on Hacker News. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11795753 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11795753 And mentioned it several times since. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17111646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17111646 * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13498494 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13498494

Retric 8y ago

The appropriate response is to kick some of these people out not simply accept that their is nothing to be done.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ethbro 8y ago
Exactly. Avoidance of repercussions for people in positions of authority because of tenure is a steep slippery slope to hell.