[WikiEN-l] Re: Danger to the community

Wed Oct 15 20:19:06 UTC 2003

> The Mediator role account is a danger to the community
> 
> I worry intensely about how this "role account" got started, and where
> it's heading. Although the concept of mediation sounds very nice, please
> note that the person who conceived of it was banned for extremely
> anti-social on-line behavior [...]

I believe that we have reached the point where we should be evaluating 
the idea on its merits alone, rather than on the basis of its source. 
We have danced around the "good contributions from bad people" conundrum 
and never reached any sort of consensus, and I don't think it's 
necessarily important here.

I would also point out, as a brief aside, that EofT's behavior falls 
short of the criminally threatening behavior that has been ascribed to 
him.  I recall  getting this message on my answering machine some years 
ago from an anonymous caller: "I'm going to blow up your fucking house, 
man."  Literally.  Those exact words.  Now, that was a little troubling, 
but the cops didn't follow up on it much and said that they hear about a 
lot of calls like that.  The point being, that the stuff that EofT wrote 
fell considerably short of that rather more direct message I once received.

There is plenty that 24/142/EofT did that justified a ban.  There is no 
need to exaggerate or make stuff up.

> Why can't people who want to mediate, simply do so under their own
> names?

Well, yes, they can and should.  And many do just that.

One of the things I would like to change about the Wikipedia community, 
if I could, would be to cause there to be greater overall support for 
those who step in and try to mediate edit wars and other content 
disputes.  Generally, it is a thankless job today.  A real tarbaby.  You 
try to help out with some neutral, reasoned involvement, and you tend to 
get a bunch of gooey tar stuck to yourself and your clothes.

By way of example, I have made a genuine attempt to help out with the RK 
and JiL matters.  I have so far been called a heavy handed, an 
anti-semite (by RK), and a troll (this last by two separate users).  My 
words have been called unfair.  I have been accused of having a hidden 
agenda.  I believe there are about half a dozen contributors who have 
generally been disparaging in their comments about my activities, and 
one (Ed Poor) who has been publicly supportive.

I suppose I should learn to have a thick skin and not pay any attention 
to this sort of thing.

But even if I do, such responses serve to discourage people from 
mediating or otherwise getting involved in messy conflicts.  It scares 
the well-balanced, sensitive, moderate, rational people away from tough 
articles.

== Discussion about the mediation process ==

The discussion of mediation and arbitration process reached something of 
a sequence point a week or two ago when Jimbo asked for nominations and 
volunteers for these roles.  I for one have been waiting to see what 
happens next before continuing the conversation about 
mediation/arbitration process.

I continue to believe that the project would be well served by some sort 
of article dispute resolution process, and that many of our more 
intractable problem users have become what they are in part out of 
frustrations with disputes over articles.

Louis