| Revision as of 21:33, 3 March 2007 edit170.215.40.207 (talk) Password suicide← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:28, 4 March 2007 edit undo170.215.40.207 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| VacuousPoet aka StudyAndBeWise has resigned from Misplaced Pages as it is a '''multi-user dungeon''' (]) more concerned with cliques than producing a high quality (accurate, objective) encyclopedia. | |||
| As VacuousPoet, a clique of users ran him off using wikilawyering, ad hominems, baiting, and other tactics that newbies are not equiped to handle without getting banned. | |||
| As StudyAndBeWise, a smaller clique of users ran me off using annoyance and vandalism, along with the silence of other frequent contributors. (Strangely, to be fair, some of the same people who ran me off as VacuousPoet defended me from time to time as StudyAndBeWise...just not against the transparent edits of Adam. I suspect some of those knew that StudyAndBeWise was in fact VacuousPoet, at least at times.) | |||
| In any event, I am going to look for an alternative to wikipedia. I'll probably have to start out with a blog. | |||
| Misplaced Pages has it almost right, but they need to do something to shift the power away from cliques to encouraging and rewarding well researched contributions (and by well researched, I don't mean using google to find somebody to cite who already supports your POV...I mean finding reliable and neutral sources who are experts and using these sources even if they go against your POV--this usually requires a trip to a large library--or at least access to one). | |||
| Perhaps by making the identity (or pseudo-identity) of contributors blind to administrators, they will be less likely to engauge in clique-like behavior. However, long time contributors are able to use wiki-jargon, and thus identify themselves. | |||
| Making wikipedia better is a difficult problem....But until it is solved, wikipedia will remain a slightly sophisticated MUD, where well researched contributions to controversial articles are eventually wiped out by interested participants posing as neutral contributors under cover of clique. | |||
| P.S. To the best of my ability, my contributions as StudyAndBeWise were neutral, strived to find reliable sources, and/or identify participants of the controversy, and were accurate. I added content that went against my POV as it was warranted by the RS I read (unlike some who may only cherry pick contributions that agree with their POV). Of course, you're all welcome (and encouraged) to double check my contributions, or just delete them. Larson and Numbers were the best in my opinion, as are some of the other sources that I recommended on the talk page (but did not contribute content from)... | |||
| == other stuff == | == other stuff == | ||
| Line 5: | Line 21: | ||
| {{user NPOV}} | {{user NPOV}} | ||
| {{User:Kyo cat/userboxes/No bush}} | {{User:Kyo cat/userboxes/No bush}} | ||
| {{User:Nihiltres/Userboxes/Friendly}} | |||
| {{user AGF}} | |||
| {{User:Feureau/UserBox/ProudWikipedian}} | |||
| {{Userboxbottom}} | {{Userboxbottom}} | ||
Revision as of 01:28, 4 March 2007
VacuousPoet aka StudyAndBeWise has resigned from Misplaced Pages as it is a multi-user dungeon (MUD) more concerned with cliques than producing a high quality (accurate, objective) encyclopedia.
As VacuousPoet, a clique of users ran him off using wikilawyering, ad hominems, baiting, and other tactics that newbies are not equiped to handle without getting banned.
As StudyAndBeWise, a smaller clique of users ran me off using annoyance and vandalism, along with the silence of other frequent contributors. (Strangely, to be fair, some of the same people who ran me off as VacuousPoet defended me from time to time as StudyAndBeWise...just not against the transparent edits of Adam. I suspect some of those knew that StudyAndBeWise was in fact VacuousPoet, at least at times.)
In any event, I am going to look for an alternative to wikipedia. I'll probably have to start out with a blog.
Misplaced Pages has it almost right, but they need to do something to shift the power away from cliques to encouraging and rewarding well researched contributions (and by well researched, I don't mean using google to find somebody to cite who already supports your POV...I mean finding reliable and neutral sources who are experts and using these sources even if they go against your POV--this usually requires a trip to a large library--or at least access to one).
Perhaps by making the identity (or pseudo-identity) of contributors blind to administrators, they will be less likely to engauge in clique-like behavior. However, long time contributors are able to use wiki-jargon, and thus identify themselves.
Making wikipedia better is a difficult problem....But until it is solved, wikipedia will remain a slightly sophisticated MUD, where well researched contributions to controversial articles are eventually wiped out by interested participants posing as neutral contributors under cover of clique.
P.S. To the best of my ability, my contributions as StudyAndBeWise were neutral, strived to find reliable sources, and/or identify participants of the controversy, and were accurate. I added content that went against my POV as it was warranted by the RS I read (unlike some who may only cherry pick contributions that agree with their POV). Of course, you're all welcome (and encouraged) to double check my contributions, or just delete them. Larson and Numbers were the best in my opinion, as are some of the other sources that I recommended on the talk page (but did not contribute content from)...
other stuff
Views
|
Misplaced Pages as a multi-user dungeon
I am coming to the realization that wikipedia is a multi-user dungeon.