Ealdgyth
Posted: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:20 pm
My main issue with this person is the fact she applied for, and was waved through, the position of Adminship. Not because she had any need for it - as she promised, she has logged just 16 Admin actions in her 19 months in the role. But rather as if it were some kind of reward for her article writing. And some reward it was, with 250 supports, 2 neutrals and zero opposes. The latter clean sweep was only achieved when the sole editor who felt brave enough to point out it was a problem that she had no relevant experience or apparent need, was shouted down by people calling him a liar. He is owed an apology, since it has since been shown that their claims she had a need, based on her own statements, proved to be unfounded.
It is also hard not to assume this coronation didn't happen simply out of collective guilt that the Wikipedians aren't doing enough to make their women editors feel welcome and valued. Which was pretty stupid, as she made it absolutely obvious in her candidacy, if people weren't already aware of it, that her position on Wikipedia's gender troubles is that the women who want to edit should just grow thicker skin and adapt to the environment set by the men.
It is ironic that one reason she has not done some of the Admin work she promised, at ERRORS, is because she claimed she lacked the thick skin everyone seems to require to do it, because of a well known resident troll. She has no excuse now, that particular problem editor having been self-exiled. And yet, still no work at it from her.
She has, in reality, and as she promised in her candidacy, simply used her Adminship to be able to hold forth in discussions with the full gravitas of having her views seen as that of an Administrator. Accordingly, as she promised, quite a few editors with problems adhering to the expectation of civility and good temperament, but who are otherwise productive and competent, have benefited from her views as to which of those is more important. But only the ones she likes, not people like the ERRORS troll, so she doesn't even have the admirable quality of possessing of a consistent moral position on such things.
So why have I started a thread on her now? Well, I just noticed another unedifying aspect of how she uses her position.....
In the candidacy of another potential admin, Philafrenzy, who some here ironically speculate might even be a women, she has just eviscerated them with an extremely long forensic demolition of their use of sources. This is particularly unfair as the candidacy up to then was clearly already failing, and rightly so. But if by some miracle it was close enough to be deliberated beyond the mere numbers, she would get extra weight for that opposition because she is an Administrator, even though hers was not a view that is any more of less compelling because she has Admin experience (which, in reality, she does not).
It has weight for its specificity if we assume it has relevance, although even then it should be noted how she leaves it entirely up to everyone else to ascertain if these are recent failures, or issues randomly plucked from the candidate's seven year stint of active editing, in which time their understanding may have evolved. It isn't like it is uncommon for editors not to go back and fix their old mistakes from their early years. It is a flaw of Wikipedia. I have no doubt Ealdgyth herself likely has a few embarrassing screwups in her early history that have yet to be noticed, much less fixed. Her own candidacy was simply not concerned with that level of scrutiny at all.
Whether someone can use a source properly, is not a competency Administrators are really tested for at all. That is proved by just how bad at it so many of them actually are. She clearly has strong views that Administrators should first and foremost be stellar content writers, and she is perfectly entitled to that opinion. Many share it, even thought isn't official policy, and in many ways, a pretty dumb position, one whose benefits seem largely imagined. But it is strange then, that this is how she chooses to make that become a reality. By picking up individual in a very public and humiliating way, and arguably at a time when it was already moot. You do get the impression Ealdgyth is not minded to waste the fruits of any research.
It is an accepted fact of Wikipedia that if you think something is wrong at the systemic level, then you tackle the issue at the systemic level. And yet Eaglyth shows absolutely no sign of doing that, or even wanting to do that. She either just doesn't care, or is waiting for someone else to hear her views, and act on it on her behalf by proposing a policy/procedural change. She has just eleven edits to Village Pump (proposals), which is far below her interest in the parts of Wikipedia space that appeal to her (writing content and protecting the individuals who do it).
On Wikipedia, all editors are equal. There are no Queens and no serfs. And yet Ealdgyth arguably holds that position now, being the Queen of the faction who believe content is King. One wonders how she feels about the presence of another Queen on Wikipedia, Bishonen, who holds the same view, but with 10,000+ logged Admin actions, many of which were overtly beneficial to their common friends and shared causes, she can at least show how she has deserved the role. And she has undoubtedly done her best to tackle issues systemically, hampered as she is with the personality flaws she seems to share with Ealdgyth, given she also is quite prone to following Ealdgyth's strategy of unfairly targeting individuals to send a message.
Indeed, perhaps the better question is, does Bishonen not feel affronted at Ealdgyth's easy ascent to power? Then name Bishonen is one notable exception from that huge roll of support.....
Then again still, Ealdgyth can arguably feel aggrieved that Bishonen gained her crown at a time when the process was a little less vigorous than it is now, and she felt even less need to hide her true self, her true intentions, from the electorate.
Off with both their heads, I say. Metaphorically speaking of course.
It is also hard not to assume this coronation didn't happen simply out of collective guilt that the Wikipedians aren't doing enough to make their women editors feel welcome and valued. Which was pretty stupid, as she made it absolutely obvious in her candidacy, if people weren't already aware of it, that her position on Wikipedia's gender troubles is that the women who want to edit should just grow thicker skin and adapt to the environment set by the men.
It is ironic that one reason she has not done some of the Admin work she promised, at ERRORS, is because she claimed she lacked the thick skin everyone seems to require to do it, because of a well known resident troll. She has no excuse now, that particular problem editor having been self-exiled. And yet, still no work at it from her.
She has, in reality, and as she promised in her candidacy, simply used her Adminship to be able to hold forth in discussions with the full gravitas of having her views seen as that of an Administrator. Accordingly, as she promised, quite a few editors with problems adhering to the expectation of civility and good temperament, but who are otherwise productive and competent, have benefited from her views as to which of those is more important. But only the ones she likes, not people like the ERRORS troll, so she doesn't even have the admirable quality of possessing of a consistent moral position on such things.
So why have I started a thread on her now? Well, I just noticed another unedifying aspect of how she uses her position.....
In the candidacy of another potential admin, Philafrenzy, who some here ironically speculate might even be a women, she has just eviscerated them with an extremely long forensic demolition of their use of sources. This is particularly unfair as the candidacy up to then was clearly already failing, and rightly so. But if by some miracle it was close enough to be deliberated beyond the mere numbers, she would get extra weight for that opposition because she is an Administrator, even though hers was not a view that is any more of less compelling because she has Admin experience (which, in reality, she does not).
It has weight for its specificity if we assume it has relevance, although even then it should be noted how she leaves it entirely up to everyone else to ascertain if these are recent failures, or issues randomly plucked from the candidate's seven year stint of active editing, in which time their understanding may have evolved. It isn't like it is uncommon for editors not to go back and fix their old mistakes from their early years. It is a flaw of Wikipedia. I have no doubt Ealdgyth herself likely has a few embarrassing screwups in her early history that have yet to be noticed, much less fixed. Her own candidacy was simply not concerned with that level of scrutiny at all.
Whether someone can use a source properly, is not a competency Administrators are really tested for at all. That is proved by just how bad at it so many of them actually are. She clearly has strong views that Administrators should first and foremost be stellar content writers, and she is perfectly entitled to that opinion. Many share it, even thought isn't official policy, and in many ways, a pretty dumb position, one whose benefits seem largely imagined. But it is strange then, that this is how she chooses to make that become a reality. By picking up individual in a very public and humiliating way, and arguably at a time when it was already moot. You do get the impression Ealdgyth is not minded to waste the fruits of any research.
It is an accepted fact of Wikipedia that if you think something is wrong at the systemic level, then you tackle the issue at the systemic level. And yet Eaglyth shows absolutely no sign of doing that, or even wanting to do that. She either just doesn't care, or is waiting for someone else to hear her views, and act on it on her behalf by proposing a policy/procedural change. She has just eleven edits to Village Pump (proposals), which is far below her interest in the parts of Wikipedia space that appeal to her (writing content and protecting the individuals who do it).
On Wikipedia, all editors are equal. There are no Queens and no serfs. And yet Ealdgyth arguably holds that position now, being the Queen of the faction who believe content is King. One wonders how she feels about the presence of another Queen on Wikipedia, Bishonen, who holds the same view, but with 10,000+ logged Admin actions, many of which were overtly beneficial to their common friends and shared causes, she can at least show how she has deserved the role. And she has undoubtedly done her best to tackle issues systemically, hampered as she is with the personality flaws she seems to share with Ealdgyth, given she also is quite prone to following Ealdgyth's strategy of unfairly targeting individuals to send a message.
Indeed, perhaps the better question is, does Bishonen not feel affronted at Ealdgyth's easy ascent to power? Then name Bishonen is one notable exception from that huge roll of support.....
Then again still, Ealdgyth can arguably feel aggrieved that Bishonen gained her crown at a time when the process was a little less vigorous than it is now, and she felt even less need to hide her true self, her true intentions, from the electorate.
Off with both their heads, I say. Metaphorically speaking of course.