User:Zaruthustra/Opinions
This page is about my opinions about the wiki and UD in general. I feel it is neccesary to note that they are opinions and therefor you should not immediately message me about what an asshole I am. Believe me, I already know.
Imbalance
Coming Soon
Why a Wiki?
Coming Soon
What is a Moderator?
Ahh moderators. Those majestic creatures who look down on the wiki raining down retribution on the wicked. Or are they? There are a lot of what I feel are misconceptions about mods, who they are, what they do, and how they relate to you. Below I've outlined my thoughts in a sleek bullet point presentation, the myths of modhood.
1. Mods are not better than you. People seem to associate the trust implied in modhood as some sort of hierarchical rank, which it isn't. Mods aren't smarter than you, their words don't hold more weight, and they aren't inherently better either. Attaching a status symbol to modhood isn't a good idea, and it just feeds into the second myth about mods.
2. Mods aren't gods. One of the first things people find out when becoming mods is that they have surprisingly little power. Most thing mods do have to be posted for oversight or go through grueling community votes. The wiki puts most policy and moderation power in the hands of users. Moderators are just efficient living tools to carry out community edicts and use their best judgement when the situation demands it. Despite this, many people think mods here are like forum mods, and that they have magic pixie dust and ban hammers to solve your problems within hours. Moderators are a bunch of volunteer users who liked UD so much they took on a community service role, which leads us to point three.
3. Mods don't owe you shit. This is a bit harsh, I know, but its important to note. A lot of people who may or may not buy into myth one also think that mods owe something to the community for their position, be it loyalty, respect, activity, ect.. The fact is mods are volunteer people, and modship is more like a second job in a mail room than any kind of position of power. If you don't like a mod, tough nuts. As long as they are faithfully executing the edicts of the community nothing you think about them is relevant.
So there you go. I might add more as I think of them.
Arbitration
Right now I think the biggest problem with arbitration is it is not being used for its intended purpose, which is the maintenance of NPOV editing. The arbitration page has slowly changed from settling edit disputes to settling user disputes. This basically lets arbiters enforce rules that don't exist on charges which have no merit. The community at large votes on rules and moderators enforce them. If the community deems it neccesary to make rules they should do so, not leave it in the hands of one randomly chosen user. In my section of the "wikigate" case there wasn't a single edit conflict anywhere in the charges. Calling this process "arbitration" is a farce when it is increasingly being wielded like a box cutter by one person against another. Arbitration should be reformed so it only has juristiction over one thing, edit conflicts.
