User:Blue Hoopy Frood/Essays/Reflections of a sojourner

I've been a casual user of Wikipedia for a long time,[1] but I've never attempted anything of consequence until a few days ago. It's been an eye-opener.

Short version: Don't get involved unless you enjoy being abused.

To read the five pillars, and particularly the code of conduct, the Wikipedia community sounds like a utopia. However, a utopia can only remain unspoiled until the people arrive.

When I happened across the first example of an obviously biased, exaggerated statement of consensus, I didn't give it much thought. I just pointed out the obvious error on the talk page (politely, I think), and went back to what I was doing. I didn't really think anyone would do anything about it, and I didn't particularly care.

Then I came across another such example. Wondering if I had stumbled on a systematic bias, I dug into Wikipedia policy a bit. I found WP:CIVIL. I found WP:NPOV. I even found templates that said exactly what needed to be said. I had never witnessed antisocial behavior on Wikipedia, and figured, what would be the harm in being a good netizen? What's the worst that could happen, in an environment with such lofty ideals?

On the fourth or fifth such occasion, I actually made a small but significant edit,[2] which in retrospect is probably what triggered the storm. I was startled to find my changes instantly reverted, with no explanation, even though I had carefully explained the reasons for my actions in the talk page. Attempts to resolve the dispute led only to open hostility.[3] Soon I was being hounded across article and talk space, with all of my edits ({{npov-inline}} and {{failed verification}} tags) summarily reverted. Even my attempt to hold an WP:NPOVN discussion was bombed with long pasted blocks of irrelevant rants. If that weren't enough, I discovered my user talk page had been vandalized with unfocused rants, baseless user warnings, and even what purported to be an administrator judgment against me.

I've participated in numerous online forums, and knew that my efforts might be met with hostility, but I've never seen anything like this. On Facebook, for instance, I've been hounded and slandered in user forums, but never on my personal home page.

I was so perturbed that I literally lay awake at night dwelling on it. That was enough to convince me it's been fun, but it's time to bring the experiment to a close. I'm sure the abuse will continue, perhaps even escalate; but the beauty of it is, I don't have to read it. At worst, I drop this account, no major loss.

I am equal parts appalled and amused. Some utopia!

Notes

edit
  1. ^ I apparently created this account in 2011, but I remember looking things up around the time of the 2008 election, and it wasn't new to me then. I must have changed identities for some reason. Or maybe I just never created an account before.
  2. ^ In a place where theory was stated as fact, I prefaced it with, "According to one theory ..." I knew that was too weak, and considered saying, "According to the dominant theory ..." instead, but wasn’t sure I could back that up with sources. I opted for the statement I knew to be true, and invited others to make it more precise. In retrospect, I should have made the stronger statement, or just stuck with templates and talk comments. Noob mistake. (For the record, I'm not pushing any theory, fringe or otherwise, other than metatheories like, "Humility generally leads to better outcomes than hubris.")
  3. ^ "We don't negotiate with WP:FRINGE pushers."