User:Titoxd/Rant

Fellow Wikipedians,

I'm starting to be asked why I need the Wikibreak. It is quite simple, when I think about it; I am just extremely annoyed and completely disheartened by the acrimonious atmosphere that's floating over Wikipedia like dark storm clouds preceding the landfall of a hurricane. The constant mudslinging, attacks, and “one-upsmanship” that pervades the Wikipedia community right now makes this project an unpleasing, and to be honest, an undesirable place to be.

Simply put, the level of disrespect in the community is becoming intolerable. This Wiki is becoming increasingly fragmented into political parties and warring cliques that make collaborating, the basic principle of the Wiki model, impossible to do. As our friend Larry Sanger said,
 * Second problem: the dominance of difficult people, trolls, and their enablers. I stopped participating in Wikipedia when funding for my position ran out. That does not mean that I am merely mercenary; I might have continued to participate, were it not for a certain poisonous social or political atmosphere in the project.

Sanger also complained about Wikipedia’s anti-elitism; however, this anti-elitism is not because of lack of respect to academics; rather, it is due to an intrinsic disgust towards the derisive attitude that some professionals show towards those who do not have the same credentials they possess. Academics in Wikipedia are not only accepted, but embraced when they treat other users in a respectful manner. The community defends them, as it realizes that they are key to our success as an encyclopedia.

Unfortunately, that same elitism that forms the antithesis of Wikipedia’s core is creeping back in, forming a menace to our project’s health. Essjay told us upon his return from his Wikibreak:
 * I have noticed a disturbing trend in recent months towards devaluing important contributors; I have come to believe that it is because the project is growing by leaps and bounds, and many of the newer users don't realize the amount of work being done by a small group, especially the majority of the administrative work being done by a handful of admins. Those of us who have been here for a while expect that we will be recognized as important and prolific contributors, and that our dedication to the project will be recognized and rewarded with respect. We don't expect that we will be blindly followed down the path to hell in a handbasket, but we expect that when our actions are called into question, it will be done in a constructive and polite manner. 

He is absolutely right about this. Every single administrator, me included, wants the respect we deserve. However, it is not because we are administrators, per se, but rather because we are users, just like the thousands of volunteers who cooperate to help this site prosper. However, the disturbing trend I see is not that there is an utter disrespect for admins, but rather that there is an utter disrespect for the opinions of other users. Some users believe that because they have been here for a long time, or because they have a few less security restrictions imposed on them, they can willfully ignore the perspective of other users, or behave like vigilantes, taking the law on their own hands. That runs completely counter to our mission, to our core, and it is akin to the elitism of academics that we abhor so much. The opinions of several users are what keep Wikipedia running, because they form consensus, the non-negotiable foundation we strive to follow.

Fellow administrators: For the love of your favorite deity, just look at the examples you are giving!
 *  I started really adding to WP a little bit back (about a month). I thought I could really add to something to WP, by editing, getting experience - I was aspiring to be an admin to really help make this an encyclopedia to is useful to me and others.  But see what has happened (to KM, above) and seeing that even admins act like immature brats as well has made me totally disheartened and I think that the situation is now getting to the stage where it is driving editors away from WP.  This is getting ridiculous.  (will I get blocked for this?) novacatz 10:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Reading those comments was the last straw for me. This is a new user, who now is afraid of even speaking his mind, due to the inexcusable behavior of a few users with an inflated ego! I’ve been doing everything in my power to make this website a place where anyone who is willing can work to contribute to the heroic mission of advancing knowledge without restrictions and make something of use to humanity. However, I cannot do anything but wonder, “Why the hell am I wasting my time?” when I see these comments, the flame wars and the violations of civility by a large amount of experienced users. I’ve sacrificed an incredible amount of time to this project, time I could be using doing something more lucrative and to my advantage. But no, I’ve donated my time, because I’m just a volunteer, like the vast majority of users. Volunteers do not have to be subject to the crap of anyone—they will just leave, and the benefits that we could have obtained from them will remain untapped, wasted by arrogance.

I remain committed to the enterprise of building a free encyclopedia, and that’s why I am taking a break instead of leaving completely. Hermione, a relatively “new” admin got it right:
 * Let's face it, folks, we've messed up somewhere. I'm not talking about the Kelly Martin case any more; I'm talking about the general atmosphere of Wikipedia. We have users leaving Wikipedia because of the general lack of respect of long-time, trusted contributors. Some come back; some come back part-time; some leave forever. There is a high rate of user burnout, causing many prolific editors to go on extended Wikibreaks. We cannot afford this. Our idiot quotient is already too high. We need to figure out what's causing all this vitriol, failing to assume good faith, and so on, and work to make it cease.

The Kelly Martin controversy is the last in a long streak of controversies that have made me slowly lose faith in Wikipedia, because it seems like we are trying to see “who is better,” “who is right,” or “who has the most balls,” instead of working with each other. The behavior of users in both sides of the last few disputes has been deplorable, and we seem to have lost all sense of civility in the process. Quoting Replies to common objections:
 * In short, it's not the end of the world when people leave Wikipedia, provided they are replaced with "fresh blood." On the other hand, where there are systematic problems causing many people to leave, that's something we have to address.

Yes, there is a systemic problem: we’re forgetting that we’re here to make an encyclopedia together, not to be against each other and become another Slashdot. So, as a summary, I’m just tired of the crap that’s going on. There is too much animosity around to be productive, so I’m just taking a break until this gets fixed or I recharge my batteries, whichever comes first. But if you were involved to turn Wikipedia into this mess, you should be ashamed of yourself. Not only you’ve lost my respect, you’ve lost the respect of countless others. So, before you post that personal attack against someone else, think about what you’re doing. Further, if you’re here just to troll us, don’t let the door hit you on the way out, you’re not wanted here. There is already a fatal flaw in the system: Vandals, trolls and malactors are given respect, whereas those who are here to actually create an encyclopedia, and to do meaningful work, are slapped in the face and not given the support needed to do the work they need to do. That, if combined with unwarranted derision from those who are supposed to be the trusted members of the community, will drive out hordes of users. So, Wikipedia, correct your act before it becomes too late.

Tito xd (?!? - help us) 05:14, 4 January 2006 (UTC)