Wiki witchhunt - Revision history

Jukeboksi: Reverted edits by 46.161.9.22 (talk) to last revision by Genyphur

2016-07-21T09:32:14Z

Reverted edits by 46.161.9.22 (talk) to last revision by Genyphur

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 21 July 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	<a ~~href=http://advair~~-~~cost~~.~~eu/>advair price</~~a~~> <~~a ~~href=http~~:~~//buyrogaine~~.~~xyz/>where can i buy rogaine</~~a~~> <a href=http~~:~~//stromectol~~-~~online~~.~~eu/>stromectol</~~a~~> <a href=http~~:~~//buy~~-~~prozac~~.~~party/>cost~~ of ~~prozac</a> <a href=http://fluoxetineonline~~.in.~~net/>fluoxetine</a> <a href=http~~:~~//propeciageneric~~.~~bid/>propecia</a> <a href=http~~:~~//colchicine-online~~.~~eu/>colchicine</~~a>		On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[alleged and collective identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''

			According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimmy Wales]], Wiki witchunts are not supposed occur.

			To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.

			Once vague attributions of the target are identified, the [[sysop power structure]] seeks to discourage them from contributing or challenging central control, by means of asserting some negative [[reputation]], spreading [[libel]], and further, using that as an excuse for [[ad hominem revert]] or even [[ad hominem delete]] or (most seriously) [[outing]] (applying some [[body name]] to what is effectively a [[group entity]] formed out of posts).

			As an actual behaviour-shaping tactic, this rarely or never works: Genuine [[trolls]] seek such negative reputation as a sign of their prowess - in particular they seek to be extremely hated by [[inquisitor]]s, since "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and others who object to witch-hunts on principle will eventually find and [[Troll-friendly offer\|offer direct help]] to the [[troll]], thus making the wiki [[troll-friendly]]. Co-operating [[patroll]]s tend to work in pairs or more, and may actively cooperate to drive witch-hunters crazy and make them make wrong decisions. This is simple, as such hunters are already foolishly attempting to do [[amateur psychiatry]] without a license, and, already making wrong decisions almost by definition. On the Internet it is never easy to be sure of [[identity]], with so many [[IP proxy\|IP proxies]] and [[troll text\|other people's text]] easy to retrieve and re-use.

			There are many good examples, the [[vile mailing list]] being almost an historical record of same. [[Consumerium:We\|We]] tend to discourage listing them, as that would only encourage [[inquisitor]]s to seek out and punish those who make [[troll-friendly offer]]s.

			Like the actual witchhunt, this sad and petty (but not yet murderous) phenomena seems to be a symptom of [[dualism]] and [[groupthink]]. Many see the world in simple terms of friends and enemies, and believe that enemies of their enemies must be their friends. Sadly this requires everyone else to, as well, form [[faction]]s (or looser [[troll organization]]s), note [[enemy project]]s that they have taken over. Since that alternate [[power structure]] can then respond with [[trolling tactic]]s and other methods of [[wiki regime change]], this tends to train others to employ the same tactics. A [[wiki vicious cycle]] ensures.

			[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[inquisitor]]s and [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.

			[[Consumerium:Itself]] should eventually rely on [[factionally defined]] ways to seek out and assign editorial judgement to particular types of assertions, and rely on [[faction]]s to approve or disapprove edits, so "who wrote this" is never an issue. In fact, that is pretty much the only way one can get [[identity]] out of the editorial decision.

			''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''

46.161.9.22: i7pfforg

2016-07-20T11:43:46Z

i7pfforg

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:43, 20 July 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	On a ~~[[large public wiki]],~~ a ~~'''wiki witchhunt''' is~~ a ~~[[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[alleged and collective identity]]~~. ~~''See [[faction]] for~~ a ~~competent and civilized alternative.''~~		<a href=http://advair-cost.eu/>advair price</a> <a href=http://buyrogaine.xyz/>where can i buy rogaine</a> <a href=http://stromectol-online.eu/>stromectol</a> <a href=http://buy-prozac.party/>cost of prozac</a> <a href=http://fluoxetineonline.in.net/>fluoxetine</a> <a href=http://propeciageneric.bid/>propecia</a> <a href=http://colchicine-online.eu/>colchicine</a>

	~~According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimmy Wales]], Wiki witchunts are not supposed occur.~~

	~~To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.~~

	Once vague attributions of the target are identified, the [[sysop power structure]] seeks to discourage them from contributing or challenging central control, by means of asserting some negative [[reputation]], spreading [[libel]], and further, using that as an excuse for [[ad hominem revert]] or even [[ad hominem delete]] or (most seriously) [[outing]] (applying some [[body name]] to what is effectively a ~~[[group entity]] formed out of posts).~~

	~~As an actual behaviour-shaping tactic, this rarely or never works~~: Genuine [[trolls]] seek such negative reputation as a sign of their prowess - in particular they seek to be extremely hated by [[inquisitor]]s, since "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and others who object to witch-hunts on principle will eventually find and [[Troll-friendly offer\|offer direct help]] to the [[troll]], thus making the wiki [[troll-~~friendly]]~~. Co-operating [[patroll]]s tend to work in pairs or more, and may actively cooperate to drive witch-hunters crazy and make them make wrong decisions. This is simple, as such hunters are already foolishly attempting to do [[amateur psychiatry]] without a license, and, already making wrong decisions almost by definition. On the Internet it is never easy to be sure of [[identity]], with so many [[IP proxy\|IP proxies]] and [[troll text\|other people's text]] easy to retrieve and re-~~use~~.

	~~There are many good examples, the [[vile mailing list]] being almost an historical record~~ of ~~same. [[Consumerium~~:~~We\|We]] tend to discourage listing them, as that would only encourage [[inquisitor]]s to seek out and punish those who make [[troll-friendly offer]]s~~.

	~~Like the actual witchhunt, this sad and petty (but not yet murderous) phenomena seems to be a symptom of [[dualism]] and [[groupthink]]. Many see the world~~ in ~~simple terms of friends and enemies, and believe that enemies of their enemies must be their friends~~. Sadly this requires everyone else to, as well, form [[faction]]s (or looser [[troll organization]]s), note [[enemy project]]s that they have taken over. Since that alternate [[power structure]] can then respond with [[trolling tactic]]s and other methods of [[wiki regime change]], this tends to train others to employ the same tactics. A [[wiki vicious cycle]] ensures.

	~~[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed~~: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[inquisitor]]s and [[sysop vandal]]s. ~~This is based admittedly on limited proof~~: ~~[[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already~~-~~discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit~~. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.

	[[Consumerium:Itself]] should eventually rely on [[factionally defined]] ways to seek out and assign editorial judgement to particular types of assertions, and rely on [[faction]]s to approve or disapprove edits, so "who wrote this" is never an issue. In fact, that is pretty much the only way one can get [[identity]] out of the editorial decision.

	~~''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as~~ a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''

Genyphur: jimmy wales

2004-10-02T11:15:54Z

jimmy wales

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:15, 2 October 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[alleged and collective identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''		On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[alleged and collective identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''

	According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[~~Jimbo~~ Wales]], Wiki witchunts are not supposed occur.		According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimmy Wales]], Wiki witchunts are not supposed occur.

	To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.		To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.

Genyphur: Jimbo Wales has stated directly that witch hunts are not supposed to occur.

2004-09-30T05:03:35Z

Jimbo Wales has stated directly that witch hunts are not supposed to occur.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:03, 30 September 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[alleged and collective identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''		On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[alleged and collective identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''

			According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimbo Wales]], Wiki witchunts are not supposed occur.

	To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.		To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.

Jukeboksi: rm misleading link at the end which was preluded by something opposite of what was in the referenced link

2004-09-28T15:54:20Z

rm misleading link at the end which was preluded by something opposite of what was in the referenced link

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:54, 28 September 2004
Line 16:		Line 16:

	''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''		''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''

	~~== External links ==~~

	~~According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimbo Wales]], Wiki witchunts are '''not''' supposed occur. [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-June/004979.html]~~

62.132.1.121 at 15:23, 28 September 2004

2004-09-28T15:23:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:23, 28 September 2004
Line 11:		Line 11:
	Like the actual witchhunt, this sad and petty (but not yet murderous) phenomena seems to be a symptom of [[dualism]] and [[groupthink]]. Many see the world in simple terms of friends and enemies, and believe that enemies of their enemies must be their friends. Sadly this requires everyone else to, as well, form [[faction]]s (or looser [[troll organization]]s), note [[enemy project]]s that they have taken over. Since that alternate [[power structure]] can then respond with [[trolling tactic]]s and other methods of [[wiki regime change]], this tends to train others to employ the same tactics. A [[wiki vicious cycle]] ensures.		Like the actual witchhunt, this sad and petty (but not yet murderous) phenomena seems to be a symptom of [[dualism]] and [[groupthink]]. Many see the world in simple terms of friends and enemies, and believe that enemies of their enemies must be their friends. Sadly this requires everyone else to, as well, form [[faction]]s (or looser [[troll organization]]s), note [[enemy project]]s that they have taken over. Since that alternate [[power structure]] can then respond with [[trolling tactic]]s and other methods of [[wiki regime change]], this tends to train others to employ the same tactics. A [[wiki vicious cycle]] ensures.

	[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.		[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[inquisitor]]s and [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.

			[[Consumerium:Itself]] should eventually rely on [[factionally defined]] ways to seek out and assign editorial judgement to particular types of assertions, and rely on [[faction]]s to approve or disapprove edits, so "who wrote this" is never an issue. In fact, that is pretty much the only way one can get [[identity]] out of the editorial decision.

	''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''		''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''

62.132.1.121 at 15:02, 28 September 2004

2004-09-28T15:02:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:02, 28 September 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[collective ~~and alleged~~ identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''		On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[alleged and collective identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''

	To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.		To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.
Line 9:		Line 9:
	There are many good examples, the [[vile mailing list]] being almost an historical record of same. [[Consumerium:We\|We]] tend to discourage listing them, as that would only encourage [[inquisitor]]s to seek out and punish those who make [[troll-friendly offer]]s.		There are many good examples, the [[vile mailing list]] being almost an historical record of same. [[Consumerium:We\|We]] tend to discourage listing them, as that would only encourage [[inquisitor]]s to seek out and punish those who make [[troll-friendly offer]]s.

	Like the actual witchhunt, this sad and petty (but not yet murderous) phenomena seems to be a symptom of [[dualism]] and [[groupthink]]. Many see the world in simple terms of friends and enemies, and believe that enemies of their enemies must be their friends. Sadly this requires everyone else to, as well, form [[faction]]s (or looser [[troll organization]]s), note [[enemy project]]s that they have taken over. Since that alternate [[power structure]] can then respond with [[trolling ~~tactics~~]] and other methods of [[wiki regime change]], this tends to train others to employ the same tactics. A [[vicious cycle]] ensures.		Like the actual witchhunt, this sad and petty (but not yet murderous) phenomena seems to be a symptom of [[dualism]] and [[groupthink]]. Many see the world in simple terms of friends and enemies, and believe that enemies of their enemies must be their friends. Sadly this requires everyone else to, as well, form [[faction]]s (or looser [[troll organization]]s), note [[enemy project]]s that they have taken over. Since that alternate [[power structure]] can then respond with [[trolling tactic]]s and other methods of [[wiki regime change]], this tends to train others to employ the same tactics. A [[wiki vicious cycle]] ensures.

	[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.		[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.

62.132.1.121: much expanded (GFDL)

2004-09-28T14:56:46Z

much expanded (GFDL)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:56, 28 September 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for an attempt to ~~assign some [[alleged and collective identity]]. Here we do~~ that ~~with a~~ [[~~faction~~]]~~, and it's civilized. On many~~ [[~~large public wiki~~]]s ~~it is~~ a ~~silly~~ [[~~sysop power structure~~]] ~~game that reflects other~~ [[~~power structure~~]] ~~biases~~ and ~~idiocies~~.		On a [[large public wiki]], a '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for the attempt to discover or assert that several [[userids]] or [[IP number]]s "are the same person" - a very low integrity attempt to define [[collective and alleged identity]]. ''See [[faction]] for a competent and civilized alternative.''

	~~According~~ to [[~~Wikipedia~~]] ~~founder~~ [[~~Jimbo Wales~~]], ~~Wiki witchunts~~ are '~~''not''' supposed occur~~. [~~http~~:~~//mail~~.~~wikipedia~~.~~org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-June/004979~~.~~html~~]		To [[require response to hearsay]] is the most common first step. However, no one aware of [[group dynamics]] will answer to this consistently. This is then taken as validation.

			Once vague attributions of the target are identified, the [[sysop power structure]] seeks to discourage them from contributing or challenging central control, by means of asserting some negative [[reputation]], spreading [[libel]], and further, using that as an excuse for [[ad hominem revert]] or even [[ad hominem delete]] or (most seriously) [[outing]] (applying some [[body name]] to what is effectively a [[group entity]] formed out of posts).

			As an actual behaviour-shaping tactic, this rarely or never works: Genuine [[trolls]] seek such negative reputation as a sign of their prowess - in particular they seek to be extremely hated by [[inquisitor]]s, since "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and others who object to witch-hunts on principle will eventually find and [[Troll-friendly offer\|offer direct help]] to the [[troll]], thus making the wiki [[troll-friendly]]. Co-operating [[patroll]]s tend to work in pairs or more, and may actively cooperate to drive witch-hunters crazy and make them make wrong decisions. This is simple, as such hunters are already foolishly attempting to do [[amateur psychiatry]] without a license, and, already making wrong decisions almost by definition. On the Internet it is never easy to be sure of [[identity]], with so many [[IP proxy\|IP proxies]] and [[troll text\|other people's text]] easy to retrieve and re-use.

			There are many good examples, the [[vile mailing list]] being almost an historical record of same. [[Consumerium:We\|We]] tend to discourage listing them, as that would only encourage [[inquisitor]]s to seek out and punish those who make [[troll-friendly offer]]s.

			Like the actual witchhunt, this sad and petty (but not yet murderous) phenomena seems to be a symptom of [[dualism]] and [[groupthink]]. Many see the world in simple terms of friends and enemies, and believe that enemies of their enemies must be their friends. Sadly this requires everyone else to, as well, form [[faction]]s (or looser [[troll organization]]s), note [[enemy project]]s that they have taken over. Since that alternate [[power structure]] can then respond with [[trolling tactics]] and other methods of [[wiki regime change]], this tends to train others to employ the same tactics. A [[vicious cycle]] ensures.

	[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.		[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.

	''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''		''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''

			== External links ==

			According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimbo Wales]], Wiki witchunts are '''not''' supposed occur. [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-June/004979.html]

Genyphur: http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-June/004979.html

2004-09-28T10:42:22Z

http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-June/004979.html

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:42, 28 September 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for an attempt to assign some [[alleged and collective identity]]. Here we do that with a [[faction]], and it's civilized. On many [[large public wiki]]s it is a silly [[sysop power structure]] game that reflects other [[power structure]] biases and idiocies.		A '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for an attempt to assign some [[alleged and collective identity]]. Here we do that with a [[faction]], and it's civilized. On many [[large public wiki]]s it is a silly [[sysop power structure]] game that reflects other [[power structure]] biases and idiocies.

	According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimbo Wales]], Wiki witchunts are '''not''' supposed occur.		According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimbo Wales]], Wiki witchunts are '''not''' supposed occur. [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-June/004979.html]

	[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.		[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.

	''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''		''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''

Genyphur: According to Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales, Wiki witchunts are '''not''' supposed occur.

2004-09-28T09:58:08Z

According to Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales, Wiki witchunts are '''not''' supposed occur.

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:58, 28 September 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for an attempt to assign some [[alleged and collective identity]]. Here we do that with a [[faction]], and it's civilized. On many [[large public wiki]]s it is a silly [[sysop power structure]] game that reflects other [[power structure]] biases and idiocies.		A '''wiki witchhunt''' is a [[wiki idiom]] for an attempt to assign some [[alleged and collective identity]]. Here we do that with a [[faction]], and it's civilized. On many [[large public wiki]]s it is a silly [[sysop power structure]] game that reflects other [[power structure]] biases and idiocies.

			According to [[Wikipedia]] founder [[Jimbo Wales]], Wiki witchunts are '''not''' supposed occur.

	[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.		[[Consumerium:We\|We]] basically hope it never happens here, but sadly our hopes have been dashed: [[New Troll point of view\|supposedly-new]] [[trolls]] whose [[trolling]] displeases known [[trolls]] find themselves associated (against their will, some claim) with the Wikipedia [[sysop power structure\|power structure]] of [[sysop vandal]]s. This is based admittedly on limited proof: [[amateur psychiatry]] and (more significant) the mindless repetition of known falsehoods like the already-discredited article on [[Craig Hubley]] that not even [[Wikipedia]]'s quite low standards will admit. Also, it has not so far involved [[technological escalation]], i.e. no [[IP block]]s, so dialogue can continue: the newcomers can prove themselves to actually have [[New Troll point of view]] instead of the very old [[Sysop Vandal point of view]] which they dredge up out of old article histories and try to present as being fact.

	''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''		''We do not invite comment on [[Wikipedia]] policy except insofar as it degrades the [[GFDL corpus]] as a whole. Such issues in general should be discussed there not here! Almost all issues we can imagine that are relevant to [[wiki management]] and [[large public wiki]]s have already been covered here, so, we don't need any more detail on that subject. Even the [[trolls]] are done ranting about it. For now!''