Resid Gulerdem
wrote:
> After my message ([[WP:OURS]] - A proposal for
> admin-user relations - below) the link to the
> updated version of another proposal
> [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]]
> under my old user page is deleted for ''the good of
> Wikipedia''. I thought I should provide the ones who
> would like to see that proposal with the correct link.
> Earlier version can be found at
> [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]]. It is tag'ed as
> 'rejected' but the truth is, I could never find an
> opportunity to
> put it to a vote properly. I also copy pasted the
> updated version below this message for the sake of
> completeness and for your convenience.
Raphael wrote:
> Fortunately I've made a backup of your last version
> here [[User:Raphael1/Wikiethics]]
> though I am not sure whether some administrator will
> censor this too.
>
Resid Gulerdem wrote:
Dear Raphael,
That is very kind of you. I do appreciate for it.
It will be a humble contribution of mine to the Wiki
community if it has a chance to be discussed fairly in
the future.
<snip/>
I would appreciate if you could let me know what
you think about the proposals [[WP:OURS]] (and
[[WP:Wikiethics]] about which you made some
suggestions before) if possible. Realizing that there
is a problem and identifying it is one thing, trying
to find a reasonable solution to the problem is
another thing. I think only talking about the problem
does not lead the project to a better place and will
not do any good other than increase frustration.
Best,
Resid
Dear Resid,
unfortunately now even my copy of your latest version
of Wikiethics got deleted. I've filed a Deletion review,
but it seems like some admins are already at a point,
where they completely disregard any policy and act as
one thinks best.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#User:Raphael1.2FWiki…
I truely appreciate your efforts to try to find a
reasonable solution to the problem. But I doubt,
that those in power, who would have to allow such
a proposal to be discussed and passed, are already
too detached from the consequences of their
"might makes right" mentality to even realize the
problem, and will use all possible means to make
it fail.
Beside those addressed in [[WP:OURS]] I see multiple
problems:
RfCs seem to be some kind of sympathy contests,
where admins get the possibility to defend each other.
It seems to be an important place for admins to improve
their social standing. Allegations are not taken seriously,
instead the accused party can simply claim to follow
policies "in spirit" and accuse the nominating editor of
Wikilaywering.
The way Wikipedia implements voting generally
increases peer pressure. Even though it would
include some technical work, Wikipedia desperately
needs _anonymous_ voting. Editors with weak personalities
tend to use the possibility of a vote to express
their support to a "higher ranking" individual.
There is no separation of powers: Admins are judges
and hangmen in one person and have plenty of possibilities
to cover up their action behind weakly worded policies.
Generally speaking - we must not forget, that Wikipedia
is a social community, where all (good and bad) associated
mechanisms play along.
best regards
--
Raphael