Yes, of course - why didn't we think of that? Actually the lack of
rules and lack of punishments means (meant) it was bloody hard to game
the system. Now we have a calcified set of rules and an oligarchy,
passive-aggressives have a field day. Rules-lawyers abound, polite
requests to the oligarchy are met with insults about "mind-set" and
other newspeak comments. Meanwhile the 99% of editors that just want to
edit and the 95% of admins that just want to help the project are
stymied at every turn, scared to get involved in the processes. A
number of years ago the oligarchy destroyed hope (Esperanza) - now the
Wikiquette noticeboard has gone. Power is increasingly in fewer and
fewer hands, a significant number of whom have, over the years, and
indeed recently, abused that power.
The solution for social problems is socialisation. We have some great
exponents of that art in Dennis Brown, Worm That Turned and several
others. For those that won't be socialised, the solution is ostracism -
or blocking as it is known. Provided this is used with caution on
community members, and with no longer duration than necessary it is a
good solution.
On 04/01/2013 06:27, Tim Starling wrote:
The solution for social problems is to have rules and a means to
punish people who break them.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
