Difference between revisions of "WikiAbuse"

Revision as of 08:08, 5 April 2010

Wiki is an open community, with no barriers to entry. This is what makes it so unique in the Web World. It's also what makes the Wiki so powerful and flexible, and yet so approachable to novices. Everything about the wiki is designed to let you edit and author content without thinking about the underlying system.

But, with that power comes some responsibility. Some people cannot handle it. There are two categories of such people:

• A Troll. These people know better, but they just like to pump their ego by messing with the wiki.
  • See: http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/troll.html
  • See: http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame29.html
• A kook. More obnoxious, because unlike the Troll who knows better, they do not. They believe what they write.
  • See: http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/K/kook.html
  • See: http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame46.html

As a memeber of the wiki, you have a lot of power. Use it! If you see someone obviously trolling, simply remove their content. Don't respond in any other fashion, because this is what the trolls are looking for. They want a response, and they want as much emotion direct at them as possible.

Kooks are far more complicated to deal with. Recently the original wiki, WardsWiki, has come to grips with a particularly difficult kook, and we're still working on getting him under control, with some success.

If we come to grips with a Kook, we can talk about it more. So far we've had trolls.

They key to dealing with trolls: don't let them bother you! Trolls thrive on response. That's what they live for. Don't give them satisfaction. Do you really care if a random stranger thinks your fat, or lonely, or gay? I know I don't. Trolls are just a party of the internet reality.

BanPolicy detail's Dave's policy on what gets you banned, and for how long.

Comments

Obviously there's caring about a persons status and orientation in this wiki. You bashed SMK for it. It's fine to use it at your own discretion but if any hostility is returned then it's back behind this wholesome image. You are fucking scum, Void of any creativity whatsoever.

I'm curious why you think I ever interacted with SMK, because I almost never post on the wiki except during times of duress, like these. I only found out about SMK's conflict with some wiki users days ago, and chose not to ban based on what I heard. Arguments are healthy for a wiki, so long as they don't spread out of control. It helps prevent GroupThink and the Lockstep Mindset that pervades other online communities. -- DaveFayram

Healthy is calling someone a queen huh? And when i speak to you i speak to the wiki. Your responsible for it right? -- WikiAbuser

I just couldn't pass that up. ^^; Feel free to call the queens "queens", and us kings "kings" (cf. SuzumeBio for an explanation...). Used on anyone else, those words just illustrate the speaker's ignorance, and that implys what one should do with them: Ignore them. If they get too obnoxious, we all have editing power (specifically of the version seleciton kind). Don't abuse it, but... Anyway, some of us ARE "queer". ^_^ If being identified with a group of caring people bothers you, that's just sad. -Suzume

In the technical sense, yes, but everyone owns their own contents, so not if someone said something like that. I'm not sure if you're right or not, but isn't this a lot of work to prove a point? The thing is, partially I agree with SMK about some of his views. They're just not popular, and he overstated them in such a way that was deliberately offensive. That's going to get your edits deleted.

Every community has prejudices. We just try to allow them all to coexist. You don't have to do this to interact with the wiki. You could just wait for your ban to expire and express your views in a reasonable fashion. No one is going to come down on you for not appreciating RebeccaBorgstrom. What you're doing is site abuse. What SMK did was just using the site. I'm a little embarassed at how other wiki users acted, but I'm not about to let that stop me from doing my job, which is keeping this wiki free of the things I talk about in WikiAbuser.

If you really think you can win a way against a site admin and dozens of people who just quelch your pages, you can keep trying, but it's a losing battle and it's a lot of effort on your part for very little on ours. -- DaveFayram

For what it's worth, the responce of others was not based on Rebecca Borgstrom being criticsed. It was because SMK called her an Idiot Whorebeast. Should willows have gone right back and called him some dirty names? No. Some people get pissed, however, and that's somewhat understandable. I don't think anyone else crossed any lines, however, beyond just a slightly heated debate about proper terminology for being critical of others. Am I saying that I, and others, are blameless? No. However, SMK was hardly the abused victim here either. -- CrownedSun

So you told me. That's why I'm a bit ashamed. SMK wasn't very political about his remarks, but that didn't give willows the justification on starting a fight. Not that I'm angry. That would be throwing rocks in a glass house. We all lose our temper sometimes. The trick is to realzie that it happened, and apologize afterwards. After that, it's all over. -- DaveFayram

Kit, that kind of comment line is exactly what you shouldn't be doing here. It doesn't help, it only leads to an EditWar. Let's not sink to his level. We need a little bit of MoralHighGround here, okay?

• Aw, kay. -Kit

What is winning Gayram? I'm not aware of the SMK instance. I know that names were called though. -- WikiAbuser

What are you trying to accomplish? I don't know. All I know is that all your edits are being muffled. I'm going to WikiMindWipe your changes, and ban your current IP. "Winning" for us means status quo. I don't know what "winning" for you means. Is there someting you want in particular, WikiAbuser? -- DaveFayram

Yeah Kit, I lack imagination. Maybe I should buy some exalted books and inherit one. Fucking Tool.

Kit, take that as an instructive example about FeedingTheTrolls. See above, they thrive on your aggressive attention. They want an argument, usually because they think it's fun or amusing. -- DaveFayram

• Yeah, but it's so much fun to turn their points back on them. Anyway, yeah, I know what you're talking about, I totally understand, and even agree for the most part. Frankly it was getting boring anyway. I'm done. :) -Kit
  • I know. But you have to remember to keep calm about it. If his points are that fragile, they hardly deserve rebuttal, eh?
    • Yeah. I just have a tendancy to automatically inject sarcastic humor into everything I write. But it looks like he's gone and bailed (or been banned) anyway. *crosses fingers, knocks on wood, etc*
    • He's probably time limited. He's jumping IPs, and some people do that by borrowing network connections. You can't use your friend's network connection for your own private war forever, ya know :).