Talk:Wiki Management: Difference between revisions
rules apply to sysops, not trolls... trolls don't have the banning power
No edit summary |
(rules apply to sysops, not trolls... trolls don't have the banning power) |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
:::1. while one can criticize the whole operating ideal and governance system of another [[large public wiki]], one should avoid naming people involved or engaging in any "outing" or attempts to identify groups that may have origins or interests on other wikis - not only is there enough to do to recognize real world [[interest group]]s, but most [[conflicts between users]] are due to the particular conditions or cliques on another wiki and need not be repeated "here". So no "precedent" from another wiki should ever be invoked. | :::1. while one can criticize the whole operating ideal and governance system of another [[large public wiki]], one should avoid naming people involved or engaging in any "outing" or attempts to identify groups that may have origins or interests on other wikis - not only is there enough to do to recognize real world [[interest group]]s, but most [[conflicts between users]] are due to the particular conditions or cliques on another wiki and need not be repeated "here". So no "precedent" from another wiki should ever be invoked. | ||
::::Note: the above "rules" would apply to sysops who actually have the banning power. Individuals or [[trolls]] can of course set their own conditions for participating, which may from time to time include ultimatums of various kinds. See [[User_talk:Angela]] for an example, one we are dead serious about. An example of lies that could be told about this position, are that we are somehow hypocritical for asking sysops not to make such judgements, but to reserve the right for trolls to make them. | |||
:::1a. Sunir Shah complains that Wikipedia's messes often/usually spill over into his MeatBall wiki. He tries to ignore it as a bad example, but, he can't, as Wikipedia is the single most obvious source of bad governance examples (and, to be fair, some good examples in things like dealing with multilingual names and factoring). This is important as you have already got some Wikipedians here who have participating in various conflicts there. You would be well advised to look into these conflicts, but also, not to assume that your decisions about them must be the same as those on Wikipedia. This is a mistake that [[Disinfopedia]] began to make early, and it has led to more serious mistakes - that project is now run by three editors, two of whom have no particular qualification, there is a [[votes for deletion]] page which they ignore and delete whatever they want, etc. It's run very badly. | :::1a. Sunir Shah complains that Wikipedia's messes often/usually spill over into his MeatBall wiki. He tries to ignore it as a bad example, but, he can't, as Wikipedia is the single most obvious source of bad governance examples (and, to be fair, some good examples in things like dealing with multilingual names and factoring). This is important as you have already got some Wikipedians here who have participating in various conflicts there. You would be well advised to look into these conflicts, but also, not to assume that your decisions about them must be the same as those on Wikipedia. This is a mistake that [[Disinfopedia]] began to make early, and it has led to more serious mistakes - that project is now run by three editors, two of whom have no particular qualification, there is a [[votes for deletion]] page which they ignore and delete whatever they want, etc. It's run very badly. | ||