Sysop power structure: Difference between revisions
when it becomes a command hierarchy it is no longer accountable to "civilians" i.e. users
(clarifying good vs. evil in context of trolls vs. sysops, trollism view, ..Red Faction view) |
(when it becomes a command hierarchy it is no longer accountable to "civilians" i.e. users) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A [[sysop]] is someone capable of employing [[technological escalation]] against their enemies, who they typically label "[[trolls]]". Those who [[unequal power relationship|lack the technologically granted powers]] will often adopt the label "[[troll]]" as a mark of pride and create [[faction]]s to oppose the power structure. This | A [[sysop]] is someone capable of employing [[technological escalation]] against their enemies, who they typically label "[[trolls]]". Those who [[unequal power relationship|lack the technologically granted powers]] will often adopt the label "[[troll]]" as a mark of pride and create [[faction]]s to oppose the trivial [[power structure]] that seeks to [[block IP]]s of their fellows. This is [[politics as usual]] - no different in wikis than elsewhere. | ||
As with cops, any view of any '''sysop power structure''' is necessarily quite controversial: those within it see themselves as "doing their job" to make a [[wiki mission]] happen. Those outside it see them necessarily more critically: | As with cops, any view of any '''sysop power structure''' is necessarily quite controversial: those within it see themselves as "doing their job" to make a [[wiki mission]] happen. Those outside it see them necessarily more critically: | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
1. at the very least, sysops should/must be required to spend one-third of their time with no sysop status at all - this ensures that they must ask others for help at least some of the time, and, have some experience of end user status | 1. at the very least, sysops should/must be required to spend one-third of their time with no sysop status at all - this ensures that they must ask others for help at least some of the time, and, have some experience of end user status | ||
2. arrangements where sysops do what "off-duty" sysops ask without question, must be detected and discouraged - say by permanent loss of status for both - it must be clear that everything done by any sysop is done on their own best judgement - any "just following orders" or "just doing as asked" excuses are contrary to a [[rule of law]]. | 2. arrangements where sysops do what "off-duty" sysops ask without question, must be detected and discouraged - say by permanent loss of status for both - it must be clear that everything done by any sysop is done on their own best judgement - any "just following orders" or "just doing as asked" excuses are contrary to a [[rule of law]] - becoming a simple unaccountable and permanent [[command hierarchy]] - more akin to a military or [[priestly hierarchy]] than a civilian-controlled police structure. | ||
3. EVERY [[revert]] or [[block IP]] action must ''cost'' something - there must be a finite pool of "credit" that a sysop ''uses up'' by taking these actions, and it must be ''depleted'' if the action is ultimately reversed and reversal stands. This is how judges are judged - by how likely their verdicts are to be reversed on appeal. This will discourage [[sysop vandalism]] extremely strongly and probably such a system could and should be extended to all users. | 3. EVERY [[revert]] or [[block IP]] action must ''cost'' something - there must be a finite pool of "credit" that a sysop ''uses up'' by taking these actions, and it must be ''depleted'' if the action is ultimately reversed and reversal stands. This is how judges are judged - by how likely their verdicts are to be reversed on appeal. This will discourage [[sysop vandalism]] extremely strongly and probably such a system could and should be extended to all users. | ||