What system of governance does Wikipedia actually have?

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
Post Reply
User avatar
oranges33
Sucks Fan
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2022 5:33 am
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 78 times

What system of governance does Wikipedia actually have?

Post by oranges33 » Wed May 11, 2022 4:14 pm

Wikipedia denies being a democracy, denies being anarchism, and sometimes self-refers as a "clue-ochracy" ie rule by those who know what the rules are

My opinion is it's a combination of an oligarchy and rule by seniority

what is your opinion on what type of governance it actually has?

User avatar
DexterPointy
Sucks
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon May 02, 2022 11:59 am
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: What system of governance does Wikipedia actually have?

Post by DexterPointy » Wed May 11, 2022 5:55 pm

In reality, there is no system of governance. There is a pattern to how the wheels churn, which is where governance could have been.

Wikipedia is all down to persistence of the individual wikipedians and mob-processing.

User avatar
Kokayne Smoke Rising
Sucks Noob
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 4:02 pm

Re: What system of governance does Wikipedia actually have?

Post by Kokayne Smoke Rising » Thu May 12, 2022 11:24 pm

Clearly defined rules mean that Wikipedia could be held to some standard of accountability or integrity. For some reason, Wikipedians, and much of the Anglophone world, have a near-fatal allargic reaction to this concept. Hence why Wikipedia sucks and the Western world is drowning like a bitch in the morass of stupidity, ignorance, drug overdose, car accidents, etc.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: What system of governance does Wikipedia actually have?

Post by ericbarbour » Fri May 13, 2022 12:25 am

DexterPointy wrote:
Wed May 11, 2022 5:55 pm
In reality, there is no system of governance. There is a pattern to how the wheels churn, which is where governance could have been.
Wikipedia is all down to persistence of the individual wikipedians and mob-processing.
well put
Clearly defined rules mean that Wikipedia could be held to some standard of accountability or integrity. For some reason, Wikipedians, and much of the Anglophone world, have a near-fatal allargic reaction to this concept. Hence why Wikipedia sucks and the Western world is drowning like a bitch in the morass of stupidity, ignorance, drug overdose, car accidents, etc.
Does not imply causation, etc. WP is an accident of history, a near-religious cult, and a gathering place for trolls who want to "rewrite history". You can probably thank Ayn Rand, Jimbo Wales, and Section 230 for starting it badly, but the blame for bad governance goes directly to the kind of lunatics Jimbo promoted to adminship prior to 2006.

If the internet had gone public in the 1970s, any crowdsourced reference work started on it would have probably suffered from similar foolishness, everything else being equal. Although I suspect the old FCC "Fairness Doctrine" would probably have been applied to it. Thus Wales and his handpicked suckups would be forced to run a more egalitarian system. We will never know, and no one outside their "cult following" seems to give a damn anyway.

User avatar
Bbb23sucks
Sucker
Posts: 1337
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:08 am
Location: The Astral Plane
Has thanked: 1255 times
Been thanked: 263 times

Re: What system of governance does Wikipedia actually have?

Post by Bbb23sucks » Sun Jan 08, 2023 7:00 am

It’s the worst of both worlds:
Without hierarchy you have the disadvantage of lack of leadership, but with the advantage of open and democratic collaboration without strict rules.
With more hierarchy you gain of having the best users at the top of leadership, but less collaboration and collectivization.

With Wikipedia there is a hierarchy, but it only lets the worst users go to the top and then allows them to enact totalitarian policies on everyone else, while having no accountability of their own. And it still has no central leadership, just a disorganized cabal that only organizes to fight progress.

Truly the worst of both worlds.
"Globally banned" since September 5, 2023 for exposing harassment.

Email: wikipediasucks@disroot.org

Petition to ban Bbb23Wikipedia AlternativeDonate to help French strikers

Post Reply