[WikiEN-l] Re: Broken dispute resolution mechanisms (was Reithy is a problem)

Mon Nov 8 18:06:52 UTC 2004

Tim Starling wrote:

> I don't really want to diverge into a dicussion of the personality 
> traits of particular users, but Wik was more than just unpopular. He 
> refused discussion and conducted numerous edit wars. According to this 
> mailing list post:
>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-May/027321.html
>
> he was responsible for the departure of at least two users.
>
> There are more important things than the number of words written on 
> Wikipedia. It also matters that the text written is accurate and 
> written in a neutral point of view. NPOV is acheived through rational 
> discussion and compromise, two things that Wik was extremely bad at.
>
> Another thing that is more important than word count is the mental 
> health of our contributors. Editors should be able to contribute to 
> the site without constant anger and frustration. They shouldn't have 
> to put up with personal attacks.
>
> Wik's point of view was more important to him than the integrity of 
> Wikipedia. This was demonstrated by the fact that when he was finally 
> frustrated, he wrote a script to vandalise Wikipedia and meta. He 
> spent about a week in an arms race with me and the other developers.

I guess there's not a whole lot to say except that I completely disagree 
with this assessment.  In my opinion, Wik was on the correct side in 
around 95% of the edit wars in which he was involved, and tirelessly 
pursued a NPOV policy in the face of numerous POV-pushing edit warriors 
who, in frustration at his relentless opposition, kept resorting to 
trying to ban him when they couldn't get people to agree with their 
actual arguments.  It's true that in 5% or so of the cases Wik was 
indeed in the wrong, but this pales in comparison to the amount of 
POV-pushing he kept at bay.

I'd have to say that I agree with Wik and Adam Carr that in many cases, 
discussion is simply not worth it.  There are too many POV pushers with 
too much free time on their hands to engage them all in endless 
discussion.  If people are arguing over points that reasonable people 
can disagree on, fine, but if they're espousing ridiculous views and 
trying to push some overtly nationalist message, just revert 'em and be 
done with it.

Certainly Wik wasn't a model citizen, but his opponents are a far bigger 
problem than he ever was.

-Mark