See why ManningBartlett left.
Deleting entries or content from entries is just a bad fucking idea 99% of the time. Appeals to NPOV are used as a club for deleting content. Most of the time it's just censorship. And censorship on Wikipedia leads to arms races.
There is a 1% when it's a good idea, but the abusers of the NPOV believe it's more like 80%.
Magnus Manske is a great person, and he's put immense amounts of effort into designing new Wikipedia software. And he's loaded it with so many new features and capabilities that noone has any idea how it will affect Wikipedia.
Since there's essentially no documentation, mission plan, or any other standard practice for quality software engineering, it's guaranteed to be a monster.
And the only one who will have any idea how to deal with it will be Manske, in part since he's using the lesser-known PHP (but that is a minor concern compared to the individuality of the code).
The current UseModWiki code is hard to understand, but it's deliberately very, very limited in its capabilities. That puts more power in the users and less in the technology.
He's wielding great power without any checks. Those who have power should be forced to justify their actions. Those with great power need to be assiduous in doing so. Manske essentially has infinite power right now.
For anyone who isn't worried about this, just think for a second about Microsoft products.
Wikipedia is a noble attempt at a limited anarchistic society, but there are now people clamoring to destroy it.
Cabals (and secrecy) are why Dmoz is a horrible, infighting, arbitrary mess, which ultimately reflects its corporate-megalith ownership.
They're why Usenet is a big pain in the ass, filled with loud-mouthed pricks without any humility.
They're why people join Slashdot, karma whore, and then leave.
The proponents of the Cabal see only the benefits of setting up a cabal, and none of the dangers. The benefits are efficiency through the concentration of power. They use the classic arguments states have always used to take away freedoms--the dangerous, mythical insidious lawbreaker (aka the crypto-Communist, the terrorist, etc. See the movie Brazil).
Choice quotation: [1]
Proponents of the Cabal:
Opponents (or at least skeptics) of the Cabal:
From the main source of Wikipedia cabalism so far, the Wikipedia-L:
[Jimmy Wales makes a model proposal]
[Michel Clasquin proposes a preliminary cabal]
etc. I'll continue this later.
Maybe he's just using strong language because he believes that's what he must do, since that is the only weapon he can wield.
But that's not a terribly good excuse. It's probably just a habit he developed in childhood and refined on Usenet. But maybe he in fact feels so passionately about the promise of Wikipedia that he's compelled to put that passion into his arguments.
Some combativeness and dissent helps societies thrive. Many have believed that the preservation of the right to dissent with utter vehemence, even violence, is critical to the legitimacy and health of the state.
Politeness too is a worthy goal. But if calls for politeness come from an all-powerful cabal, which can kick you out, delete your work, etc., well, you can determine what to call that. (See Larry Sanger/Cutting each other a bit of slack, which was written in response to this essay, though Larry denies this.)
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)