And answers:ericbarbour wrote: ↑Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:31 am[...]
And you can't talk about this on Wikipediocracy openly. Not anymore.
This forum has had its problem users. ALL Wikipedia criticism forums have had problem users. I have been around long enough (2008) to remember that Wikipedia Review was an amazingly open and honest forum in dealing with WP abuses. People were rarely banned from WR. Then in 2012 Selina showed up and started actively causing problems. Since she was the sysop and DNS holder, she successfully ran WR into the ground. So many WR regulars went off, and what did they do? They started Wikipediocracy. And it worked decently well for the first few years. Then in 2014 the banninations started, and in 2015 the backstabbery became overwhelming. [Vigilant] was present and probably partly responsible for all such backroom dealings.
But you can't talk about that on Wikipediocracy....why do these damn websites keep turning into little Church-of-Scientology style cults? I can see reasons for that on Wikipedia, they've tricked 2 generations of Internet users into trusting them blindly. There's far less reason for a forum to become a paranoiac cult-thing. It's only a forum for crissakes.
[trollname for Vigilant redacted, my choice --Abd]
Dysklyver wrote: ↑Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:07 amEvery website is run by sysops, that in itself is not the reason. Instead I will suggest the reason is that nobody is being paid, so a particular type of person is being attracted. That type is the person who will do something for free because they believe in it, a cultist, an activist, someone with nothing better to do.
I could write a book about this and might. Let's start with reference to the Iron Law of Oligarchy. I agree with Michels, the Iron Law is a structural necessity. There is a way to harness the Iron Law, it's been demonstrated, but it takes a motivated and sophisticated community. That is not the norm.