"Autism" and Wikipedia

[Graaf Statler]

I hope this posting is respectful. It is in no way meant to insult autistic people or to suggest they are less than other people or stupide. It's meant to point out the what the problem of Wikipedia is, and maybe also of every blockchain and crowdsurfing project. Because I am sure sooner or later you get the same problems as in the real world, or even worse, so this kind of projects are not any solution as many people are thinking.
After the first wave of idealisme and enthusiasm "Statler's law" will destroy all of this kind of projects because of the repression of non-autistic people, what change this kind of projects in a Cave of Aladdin for trolls. It's a cross posting from Aggie's forum.

Proabivouac wrote:09 Jun 2018 22:29
The reason for Wikipedia's and Wikipediocracy's common front is that both are run by computer programmers, among whom these views are nearly universal. They would much rather fail in their purported mission than join Wikipedia's actual critics, and indeed are running out of things to criticize them for.

That's a right conclusion. To be more exacte run by computer programmers with Asperger syndrome. Also Wikiopediocrazy and Wikipedia Sucks are divided in that way, in the way of digitale and analoge thinking people. For instance Eric and I are attracted to vacuum tubes, and everything what is analoge technic. We are absolute not autistic, but extreem the other way. We see much more connections than normal. Renée, Crow and Shasi too.

The brave wikipedias, wikipediocrazyans are simple not able to see connections because of there Asperger. You can compere them with a group of blind people on a station. One of them is stealing a wallet. You see what happens, but they don't and make the thief to the one who has to invest the case. Because too them it seems the best person for the job.
You have seen who stole that wallet and start to scream. And the whole group is pointed at you, and start to shout: You are the thief!

And that is what happens all the time. They make the thief, the biggest trolls to there leaders. And that is causing the tremendous chaos in the wiki mouvement, and makes this kind of projects at the long run to a chaos. To a house of cards.

[CrowsNest]

The analogy to programmers is good. Wikipedia was poorly conceived, is poorly designed, and operates in a chaotic and unpredictable manner, with a result that the thing the system was designed to do, build and maintain an encyclodia, is a manifest failure. For too often, programmers have reacted to a situation like that by simply trying to keep patching and upgrading, rather than taking a hammer and smashing it to pieces. Similarly, open source programmers have often sought to claim their products are better because they are open source, and when it is pointed out they are not, fall back on the idea that you have no grounds for complaint, because it's free.

[CrowsNest]

You'd be surprised the number of editors here [Wikipedia] that are on the Spectrum, and your overall hurtfulness makes you a poor match for a collaborative project.

The irony of an autistic Wikipedian lecturing others on what makes a good fit for a collaborative project. A quick spin around his user and talk pages shows he's not exactly clued up on what others typically find useful when seeking to collaborate. Indeed there's lots there to make one think he might be a bit of a dick. There are guidelines which explain it all for him, with reference to the former anyway, but you should hardly need to tell an Administrator of ten years experience, to RTFM. His collection of talk page archive links alone made my eyes hurt. But then again, I'm not in the Spectrum at all. As far as I know anyway.

[Graaf Statler]

But then again, I'm not in the Spectrum at all. As far as I know anyway.

To understand Wikipedia you must learn to think in a autistic way. 0-1, black white. Everything is black or white, grey does't exist. Here we go.

*Our mission is to collect Knowledge.
*Everybody who doesn't support our vision is the enemy. You must fight him, troll him out!
*What I read is what I read, the true doesn't exist, so I collect it.
*I collect knowlege out of secundair sources, remix it, and compose in this way a article. (Dutch)
*My user rights and the wikipedia rules are on the same level as for instance European regulation, so the EU has to accept my users rights and the Wikipedia rules.

And in this way there guys are thinking. I have lived four years with them om Wikiquote, they are a kind of family and I know exacte the way they are thinking. Romaine, De Wikischim, Natuur12, Vintrol... sorry Vinvught, they are all thinking in this way! As far they exist, because they edit on each other account many times.

[CrowsNest]

Hard to imagine this nonsense happening with someone who is not on the Spectrum......

User talk:Eatshitanddiemore
Good block. So why welcome them? Bishonen | talk 21:30, 27 June 2018 (UTC).

It's kinda backhanded. kinda subtle. They are welcome. To make constructive edits. Kinda a carrot thing. Leaves the way open to redemption, 2nd Chanceville, blah-blah. Let's 'em know what they could strive for. The welcome template contains links to everything they would need to know. So it's really not a welcome. It's an introduction to expectations.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Difficulties with nuance and social cues. Yup.

Still, always good to see Bishonen asking her fellow Administrators why they aren't more of an asshole, like her. One wonders what her procedure is in cases like this. Probably say absolutely nothing, just block and move on. Not a Spectrum induced problem with communication, but a problem nonetheless.

I wonder if the reason she's afraid to ask people like this why they're trolling Wikipedia, is because she probably knows there's a good chance it is a formerly constructive editor who was treated like shit by her at some point.

[ericbarbour]

*Our mission is to collect Knowledge.
*Everybody who doesn't support our vision is the enemy. You must fight him, troll him out!
*What I read is what I read, the true doesn't exist, so I collect it.
*I collect knowlege out of secundair sources, remix it, and compose in this way a article. (Dutch)
*My user rights and the wikipedia rules are on the same level as for instance European regulation, so the EU has to accept my users rights and the Wikipedia rules.

Pretty much correct. The fourth part applies to all countries; Wikidiots have tried to influence laws in the US, EU and various other countries to "better suit their project". Does the term "SOPA" ring a bell? Not to mention their extremely friendly relations with Creative Commons and the Free Software Foundation, which are dedicated to creating a kind of "copyright free" world. Which is probably impossible but no one's listening.

[Graaf Statler]

The Stop Online Piracy Act. It's rather the same as article 13.
But if I read all the protest in America against that SOPA, I notice the huge difference in mentality between America and Europa again. We accept, we don't protest. We experience individualisme and freedom in a total different, almost communistic way. A measure must be important for the society, not for an individual in a direct way, and we are willing to give up a lot of our personal freedom for that.

The way Wikipedia is composed is one of the best hidden secrets in Europe. If this ever, ever get public, it will end up in a enormous scandal. There will be not any sympathy for them. We are so disciplined in Europe, nobody expect this. Intellectual property is something like your car, you computer, it is yours. It is a crime, it is stealing to use something what is protected.
All right, normal you get a enorms bill when they catch you from the rightful claimant, 600, 700 hundred euro for one pickture is normal, but if it is a special picture it's possible you pay tens of thousands euro's.

But it is still remains a crime, and if you do it on a lage scale it's fraud and you end up in prison. And that makes that Creative Commons licence in Europe so dangers, because it doesn't replace copyright. It doesn't protect you, the copyright remains.
I think if the public in Europe get aware of this danger they kick Wikipedia out tarred and feathered.