User talk:Eequor/Archives/Clique

As to your charges of cabalism [...], well, I think they are a bit overblown. It is true of course that many of us are in very firm agreement on certain issues relating to insisting on good behavior, but this does not make a cabal. If there is a problem with rude admins, bring me specific examples, and I'll do something about it. --Jimbo Wales 04:03, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * "Don't worry, it's not a cabal, it's a dictatorship" -- RM 04:35, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm not so concerned about the existence of a cabal myself; it's hard to tell whether there might be one. There does seem to be a clique, though, consisting of a group of admins and a number of other users.  The more visible among them seem to be Neutrality, Raul654, Eloquence, RickK, Hephaestos, and Blankfaze.  RickK in particular has been noted by many users as being especially abrasive, which is evident from his user page and talk page.  I've seen less of the others, but they all seem to support each other in general, making things difficult for many well-intentioned users who happen to annoy one of them in some way.  I believe the Red Faction developed specifically in response to this group.  ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 06:08, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I think that's a rather strange list. It doesn't seem to me that those particular users form a coherent group of any kind.  If they do tend to support each other, isn't it for the same reason that I would tend to support each of them, i.e. that they are generally right?  Merely agreeing with other people is not sufficient evidence for a cabal.  What you need to show me is an example of these users supporting each other in a case where one of them was clearly in the wrong.  Because that's what you're claiming, right?  That some admins (the ones you list above) behave badly, and the others cover for them?  But I've seen zero evidence of this. --Jimbo Wales 07:13, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * This is part of the problem. There's a belief that some users are generally right, and therefore they are mostly immune from criticism.  I'm not entirely certain this is the correct list, but from my experiences, this is an accurate grouping.  What makes you sure they are right?


 * I spend basically my every waking minute of every day working on some aspect of wikipedia, and a big part of this is really investigating complaints of sysop abuse. Speaking of Lir and Plato for example, they are both users with a very long history of bad behavior. And I'm sorry to say, both tend to give a generally inaccurate description of the disputes that they've been involved with.


 * So, what makes me sure that the users you are accusing of misdeeds are generally right? I've looked into it, in great detail.  I have my own disagreements with various things that each of them has said and done at various times, of course -- this is natural.  But what I also see is overwhelmingly positive good work in an environment that isn't always as supportive of them as it could be. --Jimbo Wales 08:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't collect evidence against them, and even if I had any I would be uncomfortable bringing it up. Lir and Plato have had much larger conflicts; they might have stronger statements.  ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 08:05, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * What I have seen plenty of evidence of is the purposeful misdeeds of some of the group of users you cite below as people you get along pretty well with. Do you really want to say that you think that those are the kinds of behaviors people should emulate?  Why? --Jimbo Wales 07:13, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * No, I don't. While I don't believe the users in the above list should be emulated, I also feel that emulating Plato or Lir would often not be beneficial.  Wikipedia could do well with a lot less factionalism, righteousness, and groupthink, and a lot more openness to criticism, tolerance of extreme minority views, and wikilove all around.  If users are expected to be trolls, they will become (or remain) trolls; if they are expected (and encouraged) to be considerate and reasonable, they might become so.  ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 08:05, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm all in favor of openness to criticism, to tolerance of extreme minority views, and wikilove all around. But consider this: both Plato and Lir are not banned.  They are welcome to edit, and in fact both often do.  They post to the mailing list, they come to IRC.  They 'are' tolerated.  --Jimbo Wales 08:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Perhaps. You should also consider that some users have not been tolerated well &mdash; for example, IndigoGenius, who in just two months decided se wanted nothing to do with Wikipedia.  In the surrounding discussions, everything se represented was attacked; se was mocked and ridiculed for sen beliefs.  Lir and Plato may be still around more due to their tenacity, their willingness to deal with the abuse leveled at them.  ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 18:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Let me challenge you a bit on the wikilove front. You've attacked some very good users in this exchange, and basically accused them of what would be considered grave misdeeds within the prevailing wikipedia ethos.  Could it be that you could instead show a little wikilove and tolerance?  Could it be that Plato and Lir should have a little bit more openness to criticism?  --Jimbo Wales 08:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * This is another problem: some people prefer to take criticism personally when it might as easily be intended as constructive. Naturally their responses would often be seen as more hostile than they should be.  Is that wikilove?  I mean no offense by the above list; I hope it will help users to consider their actions more carefully.


 * Plato and Lir have shown extraordinary openness to criticism. They might be seen as reasonably indignant at not finding similar openness from a group which claims to be tolerant.  ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 18:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I made this very point on the mailing list the other day with respect to WikiUser. He bitches and moans about how horrible we are, he does all kinds of bad things, contributes virtually nothing of productive value and yet... he's still posting to the mailing list, he's still editing the wiki, and he can post to my user page and I'll answer him.  This idea that somehow we're not open to criticism or that we're intolerant of dissent -- isn't it a bit mistaken?  How much more open could we be?


 * I think that the problem may be that you've made friends with some trolls, and you've lost a bit of perspective on how badly they have treated people. But the next time you hear one of them whining about the abusive sysops at wikipedia, keep in mind that after years of problematic behavior, Lir is still allowed to edit wikipedia.  --Jimbo Wales 08:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Here is another problem. Users are quite willing to apply offensive labels to their opponents.  It would be hypocrisy for them to argue, despite this, that everyone should practice tolerance.  I might as easily suggest you have lost perspective from becoming friends with the cabal &mdash; but that would make neither of us more tolerant than someone who looks everywhere for Nazi sympathizers.  How polite is it to say to somebody, "You're a whining troll... but I tolerate you"?  Is that wikilove?  Is it even tolerance?  ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 18:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * RickK? Clique? ... I dunno. That'd probably make the clique effective or something. :) -Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 06:23, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC) And oh, yeah, There is no Cabal. Fnord.


 * I am honored to be included among the enemies of the "Red Faction." Neutralitytalk 06:32, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, that comment certainly speaks for itself.


 * To be fair, it's worth noting that Sam Spade, Plato, Lir, Cprompt, and myself all get along pretty well (though I've never encountered Cprompt). I'm a bit hazy on exactly who is in the Red Faction, but Sam Spade and I definitely are not, and even Plato might not be anymore.  ‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ] 06:52, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * ME??? A clique??  OMG I've always wanted this!  Back in highschool I hung out with the A/V nerds or sat alone at lunch and I would always look over at the "preps" table and wish I was one of them... Seriously though... I had no idea I was in such company.  I wonder what I've done to deserve the honour. BLANKFAZE | (&#1095;&#1090;&#1086;??) 06:53, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I couldn't help but looking at this discussion. I do feel that there is Clique here Jimbo. However it's more of a Confederation as opposed to what Eequor stated. Nevertheless I still like wikipedia. I note that you have created an account with Lirpedia, I must clear it with Lir before I could sysop you (BTW: You might wanna take a look at this page http://www.kapitalism.net/wiki/index.php?title=Lirpedia:CopyCommunism ). Anyway Jimbo should you have problems with Trolls here on wikipedia send them to us at Lirpedia. I wish you all the best and a very Merry Christmas to you! :) I look foward to discussing Capitalism with you on the IRC :)--Plato 19:24, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)