Sysop vandalism - Revision history

142.177.10.21 at 15:54, 24 January 2005

2005-01-24T15:54:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:54, 24 January 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
			''Those say [[sysops are trolls]] consider this a form of [[troll vandalism]]. It is at least [[group vandalism]]. From [[Sysop Vandal point of view]], however, there can be no such thing as '''sysop vandalism''' since the two categories are mutually exclusive. See also [[New Troll point of view]].''

	'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''		'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''

24.190.61.33: Fixed wikilink to Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion - should work correctly now.

2004-11-16T21:31:19Z

Fixed wikilink to Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion - should work correctly now.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:31, 16 November 2004
Line 5:		Line 5:
	These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.		These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.

	The most common sysop vandalism is [[ad hominem delete]] or [[ad hominem revert]] of legitimate facts or analysis, or fair comment, simply "because that user is a troll", whatever that means. This is enabled by the infamous "rule 6" of the [[Wikipedia:candidates for speedy deletion]] page, which remains despite being hotly contested by all who understand [[systemic bias]]. This policy is for the convenience of the sysops, and not the users. Users of course expect all information that advances the mission of the wiki to be available, at the very least in the older versions, and the GFDL seems in spirit at least to require this, in its [[attribution]] terms, in its requirement that modifications be [[share-alike]], and its assumption that some [[moral rights]] apply (like retrieving the source text of your own article, or indeed any article with "no [[technical barrier]]s", i.e. no [[IP block]], no [[MySQL]]).		The most common sysop vandalism is [[ad hominem delete]] or [[ad hominem revert]] of legitimate facts or analysis, or fair comment, simply "because that user is a troll", whatever that means. This is enabled by the infamous "rule 6" of the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:candidates for speedy deletion\|candidates for speedy deletion]] page, which remains despite being hotly contested by all who understand [[systemic bias]]. This policy is for the convenience of the sysops, and not the users. Users of course expect all information that advances the mission of the wiki to be available, at the very least in the older versions, and the GFDL seems in spirit at least to require this, in its [[attribution]] terms, in its requirement that modifications be [[share-alike]], and its assumption that some [[moral rights]] apply (like retrieving the source text of your own article, or indeed any article with "no [[technical barrier]]s", i.e. no [[IP block]], no [[MySQL]]).

	Typically such vandalism is a symptom of [[conflicts between users]] in which the sysop is not neutral, that is, they wish to encourage one contributor and discourage another. They abuse their sysop powers by banning "those who their friends do not like", and eliminating valid contributions towards the goals. There may be cases where this is valid, i.e. someone irreplaceable has made clear that they will not participate if someone else is tolerated. Unless the medium has a formal [[power structure]], e.g. it's a [[political party]] [[large public wiki]] governed by the policies of that party and its officers, such decisions are almost always either "sysop instinct" or [[GodKing]] choices.		Typically such vandalism is a symptom of [[conflicts between users]] in which the sysop is not neutral, that is, they wish to encourage one contributor and discourage another. They abuse their sysop powers by banning "those who their friends do not like", and eliminating valid contributions towards the goals. There may be cases where this is valid, i.e. someone irreplaceable has made clear that they will not participate if someone else is tolerated. Unless the medium has a formal [[power structure]], e.g. it's a [[political party]] [[large public wiki]] governed by the policies of that party and its officers, such decisions are almost always either "sysop instinct" or [[GodKing]] choices.

Jukeboksi: revert. sorry, my bad i edited an out of date diff

2004-08-15T11:25:02Z

revert. sorry, my bad i edited an out of date diff

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:25, 15 August 2004
Line 11:		Line 11:
	A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.		A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.

	A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]].		A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]]. However, [[social exclusion]] of some [[faction]] can just cause it to go somewhere else: as with [[Wikipedia factions]], many of whom left early to do something else. [[Sysop vandalism]] is much worse, because it prevents the actual [[GFDL corpus]] from being corrected, and may not even be noticed for a long time. So controls on [[sysop vandalism]] are highest priority, as with all other [[vandalism]] (the only reason to need any kind of [[sysop]]).

Jukeboksi: rm duplicate para

2004-08-15T11:23:28Z

rm duplicate para

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:23, 15 August 2004
Line 11:		Line 11:
	A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.		A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.

	A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]]. However, [[social exclusion]] of some [[faction]] can just cause it to go somewhere else: as with [[Wikipedia factions]], many of whom left early to do something else. [[Sysop vandalism]] is much worse, because it prevents the actual [[GFDL corpus]] from being corrected, and may not even be noticed for a long time. So controls on [[sysop vandalism]] are highest priority, as with all other [[vandalism]] (the only reason to need any kind of [[sysop]]).		A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]].

Support a unified GFDL Corpus at 09:57, 15 August 2004

2004-08-15T09:57:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:57, 15 August 2004
Line 10:		Line 10:

	A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.		A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.

	[[Sysop vandalism]] is much worse than [[sysop vigilantiism]], since [[social exclusion]] of some [[faction]] can just cause it to go somewhere else: as with [[Wikipedia factions]], many of whom left early to do something else. So controls on [[sysop vandalism]] are highest priority, as with all other [[vandalism]] (the only reason to need any kind of [[sysop]]).

	~~because it prevents the actual [[GFDL corpus]] from being corrected, and may not even be noticed for a long time.~~

	A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]]. However, [[social exclusion]] of some [[faction]] can just cause it to go somewhere else: as with [[Wikipedia factions]], many of whom left early to do something else. [[Sysop vandalism]] is much worse, because it prevents the actual [[GFDL corpus]] from being corrected, and may not even be noticed for a long time. So controls on [[sysop vandalism]] are highest priority, as with all other [[vandalism]] (the only reason to need any kind of [[sysop]]).		A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]]. However, [[social exclusion]] of some [[faction]] can just cause it to go somewhere else: as with [[Wikipedia factions]], many of whom left early to do something else. [[Sysop vandalism]] is much worse, because it prevents the actual [[GFDL corpus]] from being corrected, and may not even be noticed for a long time. So controls on [[sysop vandalism]] are highest priority, as with all other [[vandalism]] (the only reason to need any kind of [[sysop]]).

Support a unified GFDL Corpus at 09:56, 15 August 2004

2004-08-15T09:56:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:56, 15 August 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''		'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''

	Such vandalism is surprisingly common: Wikipedia permits and encourages sysop vandalism with the universal excuse that "[[trolls]]" were responsible for the edits, and that somehow they will be discouraged by being "punished" somehow - this idea that [[punishment works]] is part of a [[carceral state]] metaphor. This is the basic [[conceptual metaphor]] of Wikipedia and other wikis that insist one [[use real names]] (and thus be subject to offline abuse by sysops and their friends). There is no definition of the hated class of [[trolls]]other than by the very [[sysop]]s who exclude them, and the [[developer]]s who provide features to do so. This is the first step towards a [[permission-based model]] and there may be no way to avoid imposing [[hard security]] if this path is taken by developers.		Such vandalism is surprisingly common: Wikipedia permits and encourages sysop vandalism with the universal excuse that "[[trolls]]" were responsible for the edits, and that somehow they will be discouraged by being "punished" somehow - this idea that [[punishment works]] is part of a [[carceral state]] metaphor. This is the basic [[conceptual metaphor]] of Wikipedia and other wikis that insist one [[use real names]] (and thus be subject to offline abuse by sysops and their friends). There is no definition of the hated class of [[trolls]] other than by the very [[sysop]]s who exclude them, and the [[developer]]s who provide features to do so. This is the first step towards a [[permission-based model]] and there may be no way to avoid imposing [[hard security]] if this path is taken by developers. Mediawiki does seem to be evolving in this direction.

	These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.		These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.
Line 11:		Line 11:
	A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.		A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.

	A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]].		[[Sysop vandalism]] is much worse than [[sysop vigilantiism]], since [[social exclusion]] of some [[faction]] can just cause it to go somewhere else: as with [[Wikipedia factions]], many of whom left early to do something else. So controls on [[sysop vandalism]] are highest priority, as with all other [[vandalism]] (the only reason to need any kind of [[sysop]]).

			because it prevents the actual [[GFDL corpus]] from being corrected, and may not even be noticed for a long time.

			A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]]. However, [[social exclusion]] of some [[faction]] can just cause it to go somewhere else: as with [[Wikipedia factions]], many of whom left early to do something else. [[Sysop vandalism]] is much worse, because it prevents the actual [[GFDL corpus]] from being corrected, and may not even be noticed for a long time. So controls on [[sysop vandalism]] are highest priority, as with all other [[vandalism]] (the only reason to need any kind of [[sysop]]).

Support a unified GFDL Corpus at 16:06, 3 June 2004

2004-06-03T16:06:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:06, 3 June 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''		'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''

	Such vandalism is surprisingly common: Wikipedia permits and encourages sysop vandalism with the universal excuse that "[[trolls]]" were responsible for the edits, and that somehow they will be discouraged by being "punished" somehow - this idea that [[punishment works]] is part of a [[carceral state]] metaphor. This is the basic [[conceptual metaphor]] of Wikipedia and other wikis that insist one [[use real names]] (and thus be subject to offline abuse by sysops and their friends). These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.		Such vandalism is surprisingly common: Wikipedia permits and encourages sysop vandalism with the universal excuse that "[[trolls]]" were responsible for the edits, and that somehow they will be discouraged by being "punished" somehow - this idea that [[punishment works]] is part of a [[carceral state]] metaphor. This is the basic [[conceptual metaphor]] of Wikipedia and other wikis that insist one [[use real names]] (and thus be subject to offline abuse by sysops and their friends). There is no definition of the hated class of [[trolls]]other than by the very [[sysop]]s who exclude them, and the [[developer]]s who provide features to do so. This is the first step towards a [[permission-based model]] and there may be no way to avoid imposing [[hard security]] if this path is taken by developers.

			These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.

			The most common sysop vandalism is [[ad hominem delete]] or [[ad hominem revert]] of legitimate facts or analysis, or fair comment, simply "because that user is a troll", whatever that means. This is enabled by the infamous "rule 6" of the [[Wikipedia:candidates for speedy deletion]] page, which remains despite being hotly contested by all who understand [[systemic bias]]. This policy is for the convenience of the sysops, and not the users. Users of course expect all information that advances the mission of the wiki to be available, at the very least in the older versions, and the GFDL seems in spirit at least to require this, in its [[attribution]] terms, in its requirement that modifications be [[share-alike]], and its assumption that some [[moral rights]] apply (like retrieving the source text of your own article, or indeed any article with "no [[technical barrier]]s", i.e. no [[IP block]], no [[MySQL]]).

	Typically such vandalism is a symptom of [[conflicts between users]] in which the sysop is not neutral, that is, they wish to encourage one contributor and discourage another. They abuse their sysop powers by banning "those who their friends do not like", and eliminating valid contributions towards the goals. There may be cases where this is valid, i.e. someone irreplaceable has made clear that they will not participate if someone else is tolerated. Unless the medium has a formal [[power structure]], e.g. it's a [[political party]] [[large public wiki]] governed by the policies of that party and its officers, such decisions are almost always either "sysop instinct" or [[GodKing]] choices.		Typically such vandalism is a symptom of [[conflicts between users]] in which the sysop is not neutral, that is, they wish to encourage one contributor and discourage another. They abuse their sysop powers by banning "those who their friends do not like", and eliminating valid contributions towards the goals. There may be cases where this is valid, i.e. someone irreplaceable has made clear that they will not participate if someone else is tolerated. Unless the medium has a formal [[power structure]], e.g. it's a [[political party]] [[large public wiki]] governed by the policies of that party and its officers, such decisions are almost always either "sysop instinct" or [[GodKing]] choices.

142.177.41.52 at 22:49, 26 February 2004

2004-02-26T22:49:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:49, 26 February 2004
Line 6:		Line 6:

	A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.		A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.

			A related issue is [[sysop vigilantiism]] which is not necessarily vandalism, but does subvert [[due process]] and degrade trust in the [[power structure]].

142.177.75.109 at 22:10, 16 January 2004

2004-01-16T22:10:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:10, 16 January 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~#REDIRECT~~ [[~~Off~~-~~topic~~]]		'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''

			Such vandalism is surprisingly common: Wikipedia permits and encourages sysop vandalism with the universal excuse that "[[trolls]]" were responsible for the edits, and that somehow they will be discouraged by being "punished" somehow - this idea that [[punishment works]] is part of a [[carceral state]] metaphor. This is the basic [[conceptual metaphor]] of Wikipedia and other wikis that insist one [[use real names]] (and thus be subject to offline abuse by sysops and their friends). These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.

			Typically such vandalism is a symptom of [[conflicts between users]] in which the sysop is not neutral, that is, they wish to encourage one contributor and discourage another. They abuse their sysop powers by banning "those who their friends do not like", and eliminating valid contributions towards the goals. There may be cases where this is valid, i.e. someone irreplaceable has made clear that they will not participate if someone else is tolerated. Unless the medium has a formal [[power structure]], e.g. it's a [[political party]] [[large public wiki]] governed by the policies of that party and its officers, such decisions are almost always either "sysop instinct" or [[GodKing]] choices.

			A specific [[sysop power structure]] may be required to reduce such vandalism.

Tin Filo: We don't need no sysops

2004-01-15T04:55:12Z

We don't need no sysops

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:55, 15 January 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~'''Sysop vandalism''' is degrading the quality of a~~ [[blog]], [[newsgroup]] or [[wiki]] for reasons that have nothing to do with the objective of the project or the mandate of the group. It occurs frequently on Wikipedia and Disinfopedia - it is worst on the latter where sysops tend to delete things with no process at all, and ignore the [[votes for deletion]] process that non-sysops are required to go through. ''This is a very severe long-term problem and plays a major role in many [[worst cases]] visible on other public wikis.''		#REDIRECT [[Off-topic]]

	Such vandalism is surprisingly common: Wikipedia permits and encourages sysop vandalism with the universal excuse that "[[trolls]]" were responsible for the edits, and that somehow they will be discouraged by being "punished" somehow - this idea that [[punishment works]] is part of a [[carceral state]] metaphor. This is the basic [[conceptual metaphor]] of Wikipedia and other wikis that insist one [[use real names]] (and thus be subject to offline abuse by sysops and their friends). These problems are made much worse by [[permanent sysop status]] and a model where one pays no price and loses no status even for the reversion of edits which are deemed ultimately constructive. Such behavior is certain to drive off the best contributors, but to serve the sysops' purpose of "converting" the board or wiki into a [[virtual community]] only for their own friends.

	Typically such vandalism is a symptom of [[conflicts between users]] in which the sysop is not neutral, that is, they wish to encourage one contributor and discourage another. They abuse their sysop powers by banning "those who their friends do not like", and eliminating valid contributions towards the goals. There may be cases where this is valid, i.e. someone irreplaceable has made clear that they will not participate if someone else is tolerated. Unless the medium has a formal [[power structure]], e.g. it's a [[political party]] [[large public wiki]] governed by the policies of that party and its officers, such decisions are almost always either "sysop instinct" or [[GodKing]] choices.

	~~A specific [[sysop power structure~~]] ~~may be required to reduce such vandalism.~~