Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

For serious discussion of the "major" forum for Wikipedia criticism and how it fails.
User avatar
The End
Sucks Fan
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:45 am
Has thanked: 1 time

Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by The End » Thu Aug 24, 2017 5:44 am

I likely left some things out, but I had to get it off my chest.

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 51#p206051

The Joy wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There's a ton of silly infighting going on between the boards.


There are philosophical differences between the boards and differing views on how to run an online community. It reminds me of "The Simpsons" episode where the founders of Springfield and Shelbyville both agreed that they needed to move out west and form a free, bountiful community. Then, Shelbyville added "... and the right to marry our cousins!" At that point, the two founders disagreed and formed their own separate towns who hated each other for generations.

What turned me, and likely a few others, off with this site was we started with very high goals like creating a non-profit board and getting in really good with the mainstream media. Then things started falling apart. Those conversations died off and whenever I brought them up, the response was like "well, we decided it wasn't working out with that." Um.. "we?" I was a Trustee and it was decided that it wasn't "working out?" So I always felt there were off-site conversations happening without I or others knowing. We have so many hidden, semi-hidden, super-hidden, and extreme-hidden subforums with confidentiality requirements that I and others had no bloody idea what information we could actually share. It's a nightmare and a mindboggle. And many topics posted there that should NOT have been private would be posted in those hidden forums and I and others would suddenly get yelled at for divulging "secret" information. Then there are issues about who's funding the site and what influence they might have in editorial decisions among other things... something that a non-profit board could have solved.

My experience in Wikipedia criticism after the past ten years has taught me that you have to screenshot everything. People forget/neglect their word, so you always have to have evidence ready. That's no way to create trust and a community. In the end, it falls apart. I'm not really blaming Zoloft, but I was lead to believe when I was asked to come back there was going to be a major leadership shakeup and a revamped community here. Once again, I feel duped. I know some of you individually and I know you're alright, but this behavior I've described is really what's made people like me upset with this site. Maybe much of this can be chalked up to "miscommunication," but that means we've been absolutely terrible with communication since day one, if that's the case.

I've said my piece.
"In the long run, volunteers are the most expensive workers you'll ever have." -Red Green

"I am a dark bouquet of neuroses..."
- Jerry Holkins, Penny Arcade

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:01 am

The End wrote:I likely left some things out, but I had to get it off my chest.

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 51#p206051

The Joy wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There's a ton of silly infighting going on between the boards.


There are philosophical differences between the boards and differing views on how to run an online community. It reminds me of "The Simpsons" episode where the founders of Springfield and Shelbyville both agreed that they needed to move out west and form a free, bountiful community. Then, Shelbyville added "... and the right to marry our cousins!" At that point, the two founders disagreed and formed their own separate towns who hated each other for generations.

What turned me, and likely a few others, off with this site was we started with very high goals like creating a non-profit board and getting in really good with the mainstream media. Then things started falling apart. Those conversations died off and whenever I brought them up, the response was like "well, we decided it wasn't working out with that." Um.. "we?" I was a Trustee and it was decided that it wasn't "working out?" So I always felt there were off-site conversations happening without I or others knowing. We have so many hidden, semi-hidden, super-hidden, and extreme-hidden subforums with confidentiality requirements that I and others had no bloody idea what information we could actually share. It's a nightmare and a mindboggle. And many topics posted there that should NOT have been private would be posted in those hidden forums and I and others would suddenly get yelled at for divulging "secret" information. Then there are issues about who's funding the site and what influence they might have in editorial decisions among other things... something that a non-profit board could have solved.

My experience in Wikipedia criticism after the past ten years has taught me that you have to screenshot everything. People forget/neglect their word, so you always have to have evidence ready. That's no way to create trust and a community. In the end, it falls apart. I'm not really blaming Zoloft, but I was lead to believe when I was asked to come back there was going to be a major leadership shakeup and a revamped community here. Once again, I feel duped. I know some of you individually and I know you're alright, but this behavior I've described is really what's made people like me upset with this site. Maybe much of this can be chalked up to "miscommunication," but that means we've been absolutely terrible with communication since day one, if that's the case.

I've said my piece.


I like the first part the most, about the Simpsons.
And I think Proboard is a dependance for Wikipedia sysops for some extra revenues. .

http://support.proboards.com/thread/638 ... oster-site
"Any reports submitted to the abuse department have been handled with the utmost professionalism."

What can I possibly say about so much amateurism...... I think nothing. Better to say nothing.

User avatar
Auggie
Sucks
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 5:10 am

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by Auggie » Thu Aug 24, 2017 2:40 pm

Thank you for explaining. I agree with you, there is way too much happening in the secret forums and by email. It's ridiculous that a trustee would not be informed of what was going on.

Graaf Statler wrote:http://support.proboards.com/thread/638 ... oster-site"Any reports submitted to the abuse department have been handled with the utmost professionalism."What can I possibly say about so much amateurism...... I think nothing. Better to say nothing.


yes don't get me started. :roll:

User avatar
Username3
Sucks Noob
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 11:19 am

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by Username3 » Thu Aug 24, 2017 5:15 pm

Auggie wrote:Thank you for explaining. I agree with you, there is way too much happening in the secret forums and by email. It's ridiculous that a trustee would not be informed of what was going on.
Graaf Statler wrote:http://support.proboards.com/thread/638 ... oster-site"Any reports submitted to the abuse department have been handled with the utmost professionalism."What can I possibly say about so much amateurism...... I think nothing. Better to say nothing.

yes don't get me started. :roll:

Auggie,
Your "Big tent" approach resulted in a 3 ring circus where the tigers who didn't like the clowns, swallowed them and left. As a ringmaster you sucked.

Wikipedia criticism is a serious business where anonymous oldskool Reddit / Gamergate trolls are obsolete. Nowadays, eyeballs / lulz don't count for much, results do.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:05 pm

Wikipedia criticism is a serious business where anonymous trolls like Moira are always around, Get a life!

User avatar
Flip Flopped
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 564
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 3:38 am

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by Flip Flopped » Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:48 pm

The End wrote:I likely left some things out, but I had to get it off my chest.

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 51#p206051

The Joy wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There's a ton of silly infighting going on between the boards.


There are philosophical differences between the boards and differing views on how to run an online community. It reminds me of "The Simpsons" episode where the founders of Springfield and Shelbyville both agreed that they needed to move out west and form a free, bountiful community. Then, Shelbyville added "... and the right to marry our cousins!" At that point, the two founders disagreed and formed their own separate towns who hated each other for generations.

What turned me, and likely a few others, off with this site was we started with very high goals like creating a non-profit board and getting in really good with the mainstream media. Then things started falling apart. Those conversations died off and whenever I brought them up, the response was like "well, we decided it wasn't working out with that." Um.. "we?" I was a Trustee and it was decided that it wasn't "working out?" So I always felt there were off-site conversations happening without I or others knowing. We have so many hidden, semi-hidden, super-hidden, and extreme-hidden subforums with confidentiality requirements that I and others had no bloody idea what information we could actually share. It's a nightmare and a mindboggle. And many topics posted there that should NOT have been private would be posted in those hidden forums and I and others would suddenly get yelled at for divulging "secret" information. Then there are issues about who's funding the site and what influence they might have in editorial decisions among other things... something that a non-profit board could have solved.

My experience in Wikipedia criticism after the past ten years has taught me that you have to screenshot everything. People forget/neglect their word, so you always have to have evidence ready. That's no way to create trust and a community. In the end, it falls apart. I'm not really blaming Zoloft, but I was lead to believe when I was asked to come back there was going to be a major leadership shakeup and a revamped community here. Once again, I feel duped. I know some of you individually and I know you're alright, but this behavior I've described is really what's made people like me upset with this site. Maybe much of this can be chalked up to "miscommunication," but that means we've been absolutely terrible with communication since day one, if that's the case.

I've said my piece.
I think it was hard for you to write that so congratulations. Do you think Zoloft is telling the truth that there was only one area that trustees didn't have access to? Why would any area be off limits to the trustees?

User avatar
The End
Sucks Fan
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:45 am
Has thanked: 1 time

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by The End » Thu Aug 24, 2017 11:52 pm

I can't recall what discussion Zoloft is alluding to. We had a good many discussions about toxic attacks and problem editors. I can't think of one that was so egregious that it was eventually banished from even Trustee view.

As far as trust goes, it's complex. I mentioned volunteering for a non-profit with a dysfunctional board leadership. I worked on a committee putting on a major event a few years ago for this non-profit. The committee chair knew how to create and organize an event. We had countless, productive meetings including some of the board members and included them in the committee. The chair even went to the board meetings explaining what was going on. This went on for well over a year. Everyone had their responsibilities. Everything was going according to plan. Then the event happened and some things went downhill. These board members forget their responsibilities. The non-profit's day-to-day manager (a very sane and kind individual) had to deal with headaches galore with these board members upset that certain "untrusted" volunteers came to help out. The money meant for the event and other things was somehow misplaced in the general fund and it took well over a year for it to get separated out. The chair was very upset and its likely he'll never volunteer for such a thing again. These things keep happening and were happening well before I volunteered there. Eventually, I got a job and my volunteering petered out there, but I was rather glad, to be honest. I still volunteer there from time to time because of the manager and a few dedicated volunteers. If the board ever moves against them, I'll never return.

There are parallels with that and WPO. Some people I like and they are the main reason I hang around. If they go or are banned, there's no reason for me to stay. There's too much internal strife and wounds really for me to get more involved with the site. It's not enjoyable for me anymore.
"In the long run, volunteers are the most expensive workers you'll ever have." -Red Green

"I am a dark bouquet of neuroses..."
- Jerry Holkins, Penny Arcade

User avatar
Flip Flopped
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 564
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 3:38 am

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by Flip Flopped » Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:05 am

The End wrote:I can't recall what discussion Zoloft is alluding to. We had a good many discussions about toxic attacks and problem editors. I can't think of one that was so egregious that it was eventually banished from even Trustee view.

As far as trust goes, it's complex. I mentioned volunteering for a non-profit with a dysfunctional board leadership. I worked on a committee putting on a major event a few years ago for this non-profit. The committee chair knew how to create and organize an event. We had countless, productive meetings including some of the board members and included them in the committee. The chair even went to the board meetings explaining what was going on. This went on for well over a year. Everyone had their responsibilities. Everything was going according to plan. Then the event happened and some things went downhill. These board members forget their responsibilities. The non-profit's day-to-day manager (a very sane and kind individual) had to deal with headaches galore with these board members upset that certain "untrusted" volunteers came to help out. The money meant for the event and other things was somehow misplaced in the general fund and it took well over a year for it to get separated out. The chair was very upset and its likely he'll never volunteer for such a thing again. These things keep happening and were happening well before I volunteered there. Eventually, I got a job and my volunteering petered out there, but I was rather glad, to be honest. I still volunteer there from time to time because of the manager and a few dedicated volunteers. If the board ever moves against them, I'll never return.

There are parallels with that and WPO. Some people I like and they are the main reason I hang around. If they go or are banned, there's no reason for me to stay. There's too much internal strife and wounds really for me to get more involved with the site. It's not enjoyable for me anymore.
Is there any realistic way for Vigilant or the site admins to tamp down on the interpersonal tension and animosity?

User avatar
The End
Sucks Fan
Posts: 245
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:45 am
Has thanked: 1 time

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by The End » Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:42 am

Flip Flopped wrote:
The End wrote:I can't recall what discussion Zoloft is alluding to. We had a good many discussions about toxic attacks and problem editors. I can't think of one that was so egregious that it was eventually banished from even Trustee view.

As far as trust goes, it's complex. I mentioned volunteering for a non-profit with a dysfunctional board leadership. I worked on a committee putting on a major event a few years ago for this non-profit. The committee chair knew how to create and organize an event. We had countless, productive meetings including some of the board members and included them in the committee. The chair even went to the board meetings explaining what was going on. This went on for well over a year. Everyone had their responsibilities. Everything was going according to plan. Then the event happened and some things went downhill. These board members forget their responsibilities. The non-profit's day-to-day manager (a very sane and kind individual) had to deal with headaches galore with these board members upset that certain "untrusted" volunteers came to help out. The money meant for the event and other things was somehow misplaced in the general fund and it took well over a year for it to get separated out. The chair was very upset and its likely he'll never volunteer for such a thing again. These things keep happening and were happening well before I volunteered there. Eventually, I got a job and my volunteering petered out there, but I was rather glad, to be honest. I still volunteer there from time to time because of the manager and a few dedicated volunteers. If the board ever moves against them, I'll never return.

There are parallels with that and WPO. Some people I like and they are the main reason I hang around. If they go or are banned, there's no reason for me to stay. There's too much internal strife and wounds really for me to get more involved with the site. It's not enjoyable for me anymore.
Is there any realistic way for Vigilant or the site admins to tamp down on the interpersonal tension and animosity?


They are editing/deleting posts that inflame animosities. But the tension remains.
"In the long run, volunteers are the most expensive workers you'll ever have." -Red Green

"I am a dark bouquet of neuroses..."
- Jerry Holkins, Penny Arcade

User avatar
Kumioko
Sucks Mod
Posts: 728
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:54 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 51 times

Re: Why The Joy left Wikipediocracy

Post by Kumioko » Fri Aug 25, 2017 2:35 am

The tension are due to 3 people mostly, 2 of which are trustees so good luck making that site better as long as they are in there.
#BbbGate

Post Reply