This is purely my personal opinion, but the wikipedia community seems like one of the most toxic communities on the web. The people contributing to WP - the editors - seem more concerned with coming up with Kafka-esque processes to introduce to the community than making the actual work of making an encyclopaedia. Perhaps the only area where editors are as zealous they are about creating obscure processes, is in policing what content should they should fit into the their volumes. Truly, it is a bureaucracy expanding to meet its own needs. One that attracts a certain group of people, who have a certain view of social interactions, that necessitates certain procedures for social interactions, giving rise to articles like this one specifically.
For the rest of us cooking up an apology from a recipe is feel insincere, an apology is a ritual sure showing how its done ruins the illusion. On a higher level this type of process-over-vision thinking has ruined the goals and ideas of Wikipedia, a site which in the 00s seemed world-changing and lead it to it's decline in the 10s and to what I predict will be its fall in the 20s.
I hope to be wrong about WP, I hope for a new wave of optimistic idealism to swallow up tech again, bringing about a new era of amateurism. But with the professionalisation of even the free software community I have, I must admit, all but given up hope.
For the rest of us cooking up an apology from a recipe is feel insincere, an apology is a ritual sure showing how its done ruins the illusion. On a higher level this type of process-over-vision thinking has ruined the goals and ideas of Wikipedia, a site which in the 00s seemed world-changing and lead it to it's decline in the 10s and to what I predict will be its fall in the 20s.
I hope to be wrong about WP, I hope for a new wave of optimistic idealism to swallow up tech again, bringing about a new era of amateurism. But with the professionalisation of even the free software community I have, I must admit, all but given up hope.