Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

No, more likely is the fact that the Google nodes we're using have not yet been synchronized. It's a little-known fact that not all searches are identical from place to place, because Google uses many servers, spread around geographically. It might take some time for this to happen.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

WWP:Reliable Sources, WWP:Verifiability and WWP:Bios of Living People...?

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

As stated: WWP Members: 22,598, Active Members: 1,764

And we have 38 votes.
wow, this is fucking fantastic!

EDITED! this joke meant no harm... I was only poking fun.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Most anons don't wait for permission or even opinion before getting on with whatever seems sensible. Also OP was only 22 hours ago. Take a chill pill.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

First off.... it was only a joke....

second....why would you think it is not sensible to have the community vote for what they feel is right? Or did I read that wrong?

I said I wanted the poll becasue of comments that were left who were not totally on board for the wiki.
I thought it was best to let everyone decide.

I don't need a chill pill. I am cool as a cucumber

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

^

So wiki.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

The list is collaborative, invokes conversation and should be treated as such. It needs to be more than just a page on a wiki that is likely to go stale like every other wiki I've ever seen on a website. Comparing a wiki page to a threaded discussion is like comparing a museum to a mall. A museum is a place where artwork goes to die, it makes one last exhibit before being crated up and put into a cellar never to be seen again in a curator's lifetime. A mall is a social place that lives and breathes human interaction. I see the forum as a mall, a place where you can discover many amazing things such as this list and other movements. The wiki is more like a museum, it is a place where information will go to die. Show me a successful wiki of this nature to prove that it is the right place to put this type of content. Show me a collaborative wiki that has not gone stale weeks/months after its launch.

While I admit that the wiki does offer bits of communication, I find it hard to locate even an active project with more than one post on the "talk" page and even with that the talk is days old. You see, your wiki is already boring. If it wasn't, there would be lots of talk on it by now, or am I being too critical too soon? I think not, the original thought behind posting the list in a forum settings was to make "talk" equal to the list itself. Removing it from the forum and losing the potential conversation that keeps the list alive does nothing more than archive an idea that many have thought was great.

Now I'm sure the administrators will do their best to promote the wiki by referencing its vast number of URL's into as many posts as possible. Injecting them as often as they can so that it seems that the wiki is alive and well. They will beg for conversations to be continued or moved to the wiki's talk pages but most will not listen or bother. In reality it is more likely than not that the wiki will become a museum. It's pages and content will eventually be packaged up and left for passers by to retrieve them from the internet archive.

So I offer this

Dear administrators,
I come here for the forums. Until the talk of the wiki I had never even looked at the navigational links across the top of the page. So I have to ask you in return, what do you expect to become of the wiki anyway? Are you planning to cherry pick information from the forums to post there? If so, why? It seems as though what your intent to do is to try and create an index of useful threads that tend to be burried in these forums. But by going the route of a wiki you are doing nothing more than duplicating content and having it served in two places. One where it is likely to be seen (forums) and one that is likely to never get looked at (wiki). Which do you spend more time looking at yourselves, the wiki or the forums? Do you come home from work each day and open up your internet browser to view the wiki or is your home page set to the forums? How often do you expect your typical patron to view the wiki compared to viewing the forums? Forums change rapidly. I'm sure while typing this reply I will find that i need to read 5-6 posts that were submitted while i was still writing. But I'm sure the wiki has not changed at all. Do you understand my point?

Now I hate to be down on the wiki. I think they serve great purposes for specific situations. This website should be less concerned about maintaining a wiki of that sort of content and should consider a method of highlighting useful threads. Maybe if your wiki was used to index the forums into the types of categories you have designed it would be a useful wiki. It would also be an interesting mash up of two slightly different communication formats that if done in proper order would compliment one another with a very high rate of success. In that scenario I would be more likley to visit the wiki daily to see what new threads have been indexed into categories of interest to me, like news in or near my home in London.

So while I did not vote, yet, I will offer that my vote would be option 3. But I would start by saying the list needs to stay in the forums and your wiki needs to be repurposed. Turn it into a way to index and highlight conversations from your highly successful forums. The format you chose spells fail whether you are willing to admit it or not.

Sincerely,
Truly,
Anonymously,
-Cheers!

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Wiki could be used effectively for a couple of things. Searching the forums for information about a project and or subject can be painful to say the least. The forums can be used for discussion. Maybe everything doesn't end up in the wiki but things like this list are simply easier to maintain in that format. My understanding is that the wiki can be used a place to easily reference and store information for on going projects - so you don't have to go through a 50 page thread to find what you want. This list could be used for all types of things.


Just the way I see.


Anonymous

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Collaborative... as in having more than one person that updates it regularly?

So having more people participate will be more likely for it to go stale than having one person update it regularly? Also, have a look at wikipedia's featured articles. Would you call Wikipedia stale?

Not quite sure how you drew this analogy. I suspect you've never clicked on the "discussion" button on an active wiki. You should try it sometime. You'll find that some wikis have thousands of people working towards improving a page. Have a look at this, and tell me that there's no discussion going on (the page was formed spontaneously on 06:10, 21 June 2009, not too long after the incident happened).

I can count many threads that have gone "stale", simply because more people were not able to contribute to the OP. So far, the wiki has had a relatively high rate of activity in comparison, and it will actively remind those contributing to work on the projects highlighted.

In the last five days, there have been some very cool projects which have turned up spontaneously on the wiki: such as Scientology lawyers, Ordinance 884, Reports of assault against protesters, ‎Worldwide headcounts 2008, ‎Personal experience and Fair game, Jett Travolta. So I suppose that the pages that came out of nowhere in the last five days constitute "boring"? And who's to say that the talk page needs to be saturated before something of value materializes?

I for one think that the thread should stay open. I rarely ever think that closing a thread is necessary. The thread is a place to discuss, the wiki is a place to store the results; no "potential conversation" will be "lost".

Do you know how many thousands of threads there are on this website? How is the uninformed public person going to know where to look for the valuable fruits of our labor? Findings must be presented in an organized matter, separating the noise from the content of value.

Yup.

Not quite sure where you get that idea. Don't you think that SEO-optimized URLs that are spread across the interwebs get seen more?

The wiki is just a tool to focus the discussion into a usable final product. Do you think that the layperson will read through 16 pages on a thread to get to the valuable content?

See Recent changes - Why We Protest Wiki. I'd say we've been getting quite a few edits as of late.

Well allow us to respectfully disagree. Having observed the way things work around here, and how the good stuff gets lost, I think the wiki's been doing quite well.

You're welcome to open up your own such wiki. This one's purpose has already been defined.

To each their own.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Rather than argue all the replies to each of my main points since as you point out, we are definitely on opposite sides. I want to address the collaborative nature of this project. Incidentally, just to clarify the term "mall" i realized I may have come off using the typical American version of the word meaning a big square building with useless stores and wierd groups of kids that patrol it carrying skateboards, I mean the more European meaning of a large grassy area where the cool kids hang out, to which you are cordially invited.

My response would be to suggest, gasp, yet another poll.

1) Do you plan to contribute to the wiki page that lists scientologists that speak out?
2) would you prefer to PM/email your suggestions to such a list to a person to include on the list
3) I just like to troll the thread that has the list as it makes me feel important

You see, while I admit that your responses are completely valid and I appreciate the time you took to go into such detail. I'd rather pound down a few drafts and point out to the OP that they missed someone or they spelled that name wrong or whatever. I can't be bothered to setup an account and forget about editing it on the wiki.

Maybe my argument against the wiki has more to do with process over outcome. And possibly our collective desires over procedure. Allow me to explain my thoughts here.

We have this guy RightOn that happily maintains this forum post in the manner in which they are comfortable. Whether wiki is better or not, the chap is clearly not interested in another format. Whatever their grief may be is irrelevant. If we change nothing, he will happily continue the list and so long as we all think its a good idea to have such a list and allow the random bumps it may acquire, the list will live happily in the forums.

So why are we fixing something that isn't broke?

The collaboration can exist in a variety of formats and I completely appreciate the idea of having many people assist in maintaining the list. I spent some time and not only read the list and clicked many of the links, I read every single thread. I invite you to do the same because I think some intentions were thrown to the wayside. The OP never wanted to "own" it, that is clearly expressed several times over. Many came forward saying more needed to be done, one such instance seems to have the top Google rank using wordpress or some blog thing which I think is pure genius for this list.

So going on the assumption that RightOn wishes to step aside to let this grow its own legs. Also assuming the community likes the subject matter at hand, I agree with one of the other fantastic posts touting this as being the idea that will take down Scientology, I see this list as a virus that could spread from the inside and do serious damage. Are we doing it justice? I'm sorry I don't stand behind the wiki. I think the link to the list in the wiki should link to the thread that the OP is willing to maintain.

I appreciate the wealth of information that the wiki is capable of producing and maintaining. I think some information is well served. Incidentally comparing this wiki to the likes of wikipedia is like comparing this post to the holy bible. If the wiki pages were articles on wikipedia I would have applauded your efforts, but implementing some freeware application tiki wiki or whatever it is seems dumb. If its about exposure then why isn't it in wikipedia? Given your plethera of responses to this post basically trying to herd the cats into agreeing with "wiki" like sheep headed to slaughter pretty much renders this poll useless if you are going to argue down every possible argument against to turn it in your favor just makes me think of you as being nothing more than some control freak that like Karl Rove would speak the party line for your ex president bush will stop at nothing to convince everyone that wiki is the be all and end all of everything good and evil. Am I wrong? If you say I am then you contradict every response you've made.

But I am not writing to annoy you, I rather like your writing in general and we do fight for the same cause. So please understand my high spirits in this com cycle, its a blast to argue over something so silly.

So what I will leave you with is just this simple thought. If the OP is willing to maintin the list in one format and has no desire in another format, why risk moving it to another format assuming that others that have not stepped forward will maintain it just as well? Link to it from the wiki, which I think is a good thing, but why move it?

In the words of the Paul McCartney

Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be

I seek what is best for this, I hope you don't cloud it with your seemlingly control freakish agenda to force it into the wiki which will do nothing more than disconnect this child from RightOn. The other mods clearly act as nothing more than a chorus towing the party line for the wiki so I disregard any of their replies as nothing more than noise. A quote with the single word "wiki" below is as worthless as their boring youtube videos.

I hope you seek what is best and are not forcing what you think is best. You are clearly mistaken on how much others like wikis if that is the case. Ideally, I'd like to see stats, the one thing that would stand to shut me up and lay me down for good. If you can prove that more people visit the list on the wiki than view it in the forums, I'll shut my mouth. I may even join you in acquiring a tattoo that says "wiki" across my lower back to which I'd be suprised if you don't have considering your obvious passion for them.

Is your intention to promote a wiki or take down scientology with a list? I hope it is the latter and if it is then make sure you've got someone interested in maintaining it. As it stands now it is evident that the list on the forums is more up to date than the wiki, so before you argue back with me more, maybe you ought to go fix it up a bit since the collaboration of the entire community is currently broken.

Cheers!

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

I won't respond to most of your post, as I think we've made our respective points quite clear. I do want to respond to this though.

I don't quite understand where you see a "seemingly control freakish agenda". I advocate the use of the wiki to help enable others to contribute, not so that I may find an avenue of control; that's ludicrous on it's face. Further, this poll was RightOn's idea, not mine. I've simply been expressing my opinion on the wiki option here because I happen to believe that it is the best way to proceed. Am I not entitled to do that?

I'm not here to prove ANYTHING. All I'm doing is putting forward another media for anons to contribute. Why is that so hard to accept? This isn't about stats, showing which is best, or cutting off legs. This is about utilizing the hydra of anonymous. You reserve your own right to say what you wish about the media of the wiki, but I have personally seen a number of people jump on board willing to help that endeavor. I do not think that you wish to discourage the efforts of those who collect and refine information, but if you cannot accept that a group of others are contributing to and using the wiki, how can you claim otherwise?

FYI, I am the OP of the other thread that suggested that this list could take down Scientology. I meant every word of what I said there, because I honestly think that Scientology's resources cannot handle the influx of experiences which this list highlights. I've outlined my reasoning against having one person maintaining the list quite succinctly, and I haven't seen you rebut any of those points yet. The only reason I have not updated the wiki myself is because the community has not come to a consensus yet. In terms of research, I had originally contributed some 40 names to RightOn's thread.

I've been privately corresponding with RightOn through all of this, taking the utmost precaution to respect his efforts and give him the credit he deserves. He suggested that we create a poll to gauge the community's intention, so that's what I did. I spent an hour composing the OP of this thread and the poll options (with input from RightOn) to be sensitive to his intentions and frame the words neutrally. You can criticize the concept of the wiki all you want, but if a community of dedicated individuals decides to update it (which it has), I suggest that you make your case to the community in the proper thread.

All the best,
anon1mous

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

There are only 8 votes for a thread only solution, which is currently what's in place while the wiki is locked.

I suggest you reopen the wiki before we lose momentum.

RightOn can maintain the thread here if he/she wishes to and can take the 5 minutes it would take to learn how to add entries to the wiki page when he/she is ready. A wiki mod can ensure that the the wiki misses no new entries by referral to body of the thread (not the opening post) where additional entries are noted.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

I'll start with answers from your latest. I also want to again express the joy I have in participating with this conversation.

I used the term control freakish referring to your response to nearly every post that is against the wiki. I would be open to an argument if I suggested that instead of using anything here we post the names on bar napkins and spread them around various cities instead but basically any offer to expand on option number 3 is met by a post from you opposing it. That is how I spell control freakish.

I have no trouble accepting using a different medium. What I am challenging is the manner in which human interaction is removed in the wiki. I rather enjoy the idea of sending a private message to an individual who will maintain the list. Ideally RightOn would update the wiki alone with only a cautious few others stepping in as needed.

I will address the other stuff which I have failed to address.

I'm not against the wiki overall, I'm against taking collaborative lists and putting them there when someone is willing to maintain it in a different format than what is being forced upon them. So I don't see a need to fight in the other forum you suggested, but thank you for the link. I also find the wiki to be ugly, cold and not inviting, but that is my opinion of all wikis, but it could stand to be dressed up a little. I may take that argument to the other thread.

While I appreciate the quantity of individuals watching the wiki to prevent wrongdoing this is only effective when a few small issues arise which are quickly recovered. Scilons are of the type that will be relentless should they catch onto the idea of trashing the wiki. My fear is for the disinformation to be diseminated prior to a mod catching it. Therefore I'd prefer a more closed wiki where the article editors are hand selected. But I understand that argument is really for the alternate link your provided. I just needed to make that argument in the context here. My basis is looking back to a wikipedia page that had been torn apart by malicious individuals that did it in such a manner that it was difficult to recover from. Several instances have taken place including four or five years ago when the wikipedia entry for the USA suggested that america was founded by Batman in 2000BC. Further the mistake was left for a couple weeks because it had been burried in a paragraph that none of the main editors really looked at. I wish no such misfortune here. But at the same time I fail to understand why lots of people need to be able to edit, contributions to the list could take the form of other avenues such as the talk feature or linking back to the original forum thread which could then allow for private messages, etc.

This would remove the issue of having all the burden on a single individual and a forum arrangement that makes it difficult for others to take part in editing when absolutely needed.

For the argument of fear from scientology tracking them down, while I consider that mildly valid, the fear is more in the individuals on the list. That is my opinion as I am on the list. So you must understand that my passion about this is from a different perspective. I have a much different sense of ownership than you do, unless you are also on the list in which case we obviously just think differently altogether.

I will end offering this, its scary enough to leave the cult, tweaks up a bit when you speak out and then hits the top when you are identified as doing such. Even though I have spoken out and continue to do so, I wear a mask when I protest (though I have to admit that I just like wearing the suit and mask cause it is cool). My current form of speaking out is more in the form of letter writing and other avenues since for whatever reasons the anonymous members don't always embrace ex scientologists. I repsect the distrust, it goes both ways. So when you make your decision on how you will proceed I ask that you consider a few things. Remove the votes for you and the other administrators/mods whose sole interest is in promotion of the wiki. I think there is a bias there that cannot be overcome and is unfair. Remove RightOn's vote which is equally biased. I think you will find that option number 3 ends up winning in those circumstances. Silence is generally counted as a nay vote so I would propose that option 3 is nay and all those who have not voted are counted there (joshing of course).

My opinion on what number three means is that the wiki page turns into a heading with clear instructions on how to arrive on the list without having to signup for an editing account. Your book of lists should all follow that sort of format and be handed over to a small number of trusted individuals that have expressed interest in maintaining the lists (I love the list but am not interested in that sort of task). Of those individuals I think RightOn should be the main person. I may have taken the comments wrong but it is truly my impression that they don't want to work on something that can so easily fall to pieces by a few trolls. If that is what number three could mean and RightOn agreed to step in and assist then would you consider changing your vote from 2 to 3? I hope so because it clearly is what would be best for the list since the voting is showing not to be in favor of keeping it as it were.

So while I've answered your questions, anything I may have left out was not intentional. I wish for you to answer my simple question. If he is willing to do the work in one format but not another, why is it better to move it from them risking losing someone who is interested in maintaining it? Again, I'm speaking completely in terms of risk and reward. You have been rewarded with such a list and have had to do nothing to keep it going thus far, moving it will do nothing more than cause work for yourself or others. So what are you actually gaining in the end?

Cheers!

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Exactly. Discuss on WWP, store output in a wiki.

Besides, WWP isn't blessed with the best search engine and the database/software is no doubt harder to distribute/replicate than a wiki. At some point being able to quickly recreate instances of Chanology output might be a huge advantage.

Time capsules for results, good. Relying on a single forum for everything, bad.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

That is how I spell methodical.

I'm glad you are enjoying the conversation. I really am. Your involvement in it will be enhanced by respecting the contributions of others and reducing the number of assumptions you make about others. Try to address the issue, not the person.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Looks to me that making a decision between wiki and/or thread is pretty hard. That's fine with me, as making a good decision might take some time.

However, we should not spend too much time. It think it is better to spend our time on enlarging the list.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

ok.... just got done with a hellish work day....
My feelings, if anyone cares.
The poll was made because some people were expressing some doubts about the wiki.
I certainly did not want all this arguing to insue.

I made a list and was very happy with it here and adding names after they were checked out and such... and the mods said that if the charachter count exceeded the first post, that they would hijack post 2, and even 3 and 4 if needed to continue the list.
So I thought everything was fine...more names were coming in, and it was cool.

Then along came the wiki ....which at first I was happy to see, than after thinking about it, and talking to a freind that said he has seen Wikis die and one from his work that took a crazy amount of work and that everyone was excited about at first, but then people lost interest in it and then it died.
So this worried me.
On one hand I am willing to of course go with the majority of the vote if people want the list to now only be updated on the wiki.On the other hand I would still feel bad if it got trashed or dies.

Do I think it will get trashed? maybe not in the beginning, but yes, I think it will get trashed, and much time will be spent trying to correct what people did rather than listing names.

Do I want my hard work going down the tubes? no.

Do I want the list to be on the Wiki? YES.... of course....but I think it's better if it updated here first.
I thought I would put the names on the wiki myself at first..... but I have decided not to.

I just thought if I can do the list here , and then have anyone who likes or wants to wiki update it there, all would be fine.

Is it good that I am the only one to update the list here? maybe not. But I at least I am reliable, and I am not going anywhere, AND I can work on it while at work.

Do I think people will go there and hang out? no.

Do I think people will visit the wiki?I don't know. Not really up on that stuff. I find most people don't know much about wikis.

So.... I would like to continue to add names here. And whoever wants to add them to the Wiki they can.

As far as a medical emergency or vacation? yes of course those will happen. I am sure the mods can take the thread over if they want in case of an emergency.... but I really don't understand what the emergency would be?
I mean if names can't be added for 2 weeks is that an emergency? Besides, I was planning on adding the majortiy of the names as I get to them on a daily basis when I can.... names will only be coming in dribs and drabs after that. I would assume.

As far as someone mentioned to take the votes away of the mods and myself off the poll? Fine with me. I only want whats fair.
so.... as it stands, I don't want to wiki, I want to update here, and people can update over on the wiki.
I am NOT trying to leaderfag or step in the way of progress. But that is my opinion, and what I feel comfortable doing.

Please lets not argue. All comments and suggestions should be viewed and discussed by the community. Not argued by people who created the wiki. Seem fair?

If we can't come to a solution very soon, I would be glad to start tomorrow addding the names to the list HERE,as to not waste any more time. Whoever wants to put them over on the wiki can fee free to do so.
I hope I havn't disapointed anyone. I am just trying to be fair, and I really don't think it is fair to try to force me to work on the list on the wiki when I don't care to.

If the vote goes to the Wiki.....I will continue to add names here in the posts like others....so they can be transferred over to the wiki by all that edit over there.


I also will be VERY sad to see the list get trashed in any way or die when and if people lose interest.

will also post this on The List thread

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

anonamusebouche, you clearly have a different opinion on this whole matter than I do. And I'm more than happy to refute factual or logical errors when I see them, but you're replying with way too many words here for me to effectively do so.

At this point I'll be disengaging from our conversation because I don't think that anything more can be gained from it. Thanks for your input.

tl;dr: tl;dr

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Just an observation here, RightOn. Let's take a hypothetical situation here. Let's say that we switched to the wiki as a primary holding place of the list. The worst that could happen is that either:
1. Bad/unreliable information enters the list, somehow
or
2. People lose interest

Problem #1 is best dealt with enough people to moderate the list. If problem #2 came up after a week or two, could we not move the list back to the forum at that point? We're dealing with digital information here, which doesn't get "trashed". If people lose interest, we can always revert back to our old ways of doing things.

Note that on the wiki, every single change of the page is saved (unlike the forum), so we can at any point use a previous version of the list elsewhere.

What I'm asking for here is a chance; a chance to demonstrate to you that the community is indeed quite interested in giving your project wings. If you allow the community to prove this to you, the best thing that could happen is that your list grows and matures substantially. The worst that could happen? Losing a few days and going back to managing it on the forum, which would let us pick up where we left off again.

Ultimately, your hard work will never go down the tubes. The list isn't going to disappear, and I don't think you are either. As long as those two things are true, you should be in luck.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

ONly read the first two pages

RightOn needs2learn2Wiki and all will be well

/

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

lrn2wiki or Lucky gets it

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

That's not a fair characterisation of the comment.
But it is funny.

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

Join Date 07-25-2009
Total Posts 1

Re: Your vote/opinion is needed: On the wiki and list of ex-scientologists

<3