Revision as of 08:12, 3 March 2007 view sourceAude (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers40,091 edits →Cautious Thank You: personal attack removed, +comments← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:13, 3 March 2007 view source Shojo (talk | contribs)547 edits →Attn: []: cf earlier statement …using wikEdNext edit → | ||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
:This, along with the letter to the professor, is what did it for me, and I have no doubt that, as you say, you were not aware of these when you'd made your earlier statement. | :This, along with the letter to the professor, is what did it for me, and I have no doubt that, as you say, you were not aware of these when you'd made your earlier statement. | ||
:Though it may seem counterintuitive, I recommend that you or someone in your trust contact the New Yorker, and point them to the relevant RfC. It will show them that we well understand - overwhelmingly in fact - the difference between pseudonymity and the abuse of false credentials. One may contrast this with similar examples in academia (see ]) which took years to act upon, the responses to which included a great deal more ambiguity and excuse-making than is found here.] 07:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC) | :Though it may seem counterintuitive, I recommend that you or someone in your trust contact the New Yorker, and point them to the relevant RfC. It will show them that we well understand - overwhelmingly in fact - the difference between pseudonymity and the abuse of false credentials. One may contrast this with similar examples in academia (see ]) which took years to act upon, the responses to which included a great deal more ambiguity and excuse-making than is found here.] 07:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
::It's a little difficult to square "I want to make it perfectly clear that my past support of EssJay in this matter was fully based on a lack of knowledge about what has been going on. Even now, I have not been able to check diffs, etc." with (on 1 March): ''"Essjay has always been, and still is, a fantastic editor and trusted member of the community. He apologized to me and to the community for any harm caused. Trolls are claiming that he "bragged" about it: this is bullshit. He has been thoughtful and contrite about the entire matter and I consider it settled."'' Especially difficult to reconcile in view of the very strong language used to support ]. The earlier remarks suggest knowledge of at least <font color="green">some</font color> of the issues. --] 08:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
::I think the professor also needs an explanation and apology, rather than finding out about all this through some other means. ] 07:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC) | ::I think the professor also needs an explanation and apology, rather than finding out about all this through some other means. ] 07:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:13, 3 March 2007
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 18. Sections without timestamps are not archived. |
I have blanked my entire talk page to make sure this statement gets adequate attention. Hopefully someone more clueful than me :-) can archive things properly. Done.
I have been for several days in a remote part of India with little or no Internet access. I only learned this morning that EssJay used his false credentials in content disputes. I understood this to be primarily the matter of a pseudonymous identity (something very mild and completely understandable given the personal dangers possible on the Internet) and not a matter of violation of people's trust. I want to make it perfectly clear that my past support of EssJay in this matter was fully based on a lack of knowledge about what has been going on. Even now, I have not been able to check diffs, etc.
I have asked EssJay to resign his positions of trust within the community. In terms of the full parameters of what happens next, I advise (as usual) that we take a calm, loving, and reasonable approach. From the moment this whole thing became known, EssJay has been contrite and apologetic. People who characterize him as being "proud" of it or "bragging" are badly mistaken.
On a personal level, EssJay has apologized to me, and I have accepted his apology on a personal level, and I think this is the right thing to do. If anyone else feels that they need or want a personal apology, please ask him for it. And if you find it to be sincere, then I hope you will accept it too, but each person must make their own judgments. Despite my personal forgiveness, I hope that he will accept my resignation request, because forgiveness or not, these positions are not appropriate for him now.
I still have limited net access... for a couple of hours here I will be online, and then I am offline until I am in Japan tomorrow morning. I beleive I will have a fast and stable Internet connection at that time, and I will deal with this further at that time.
Misplaced Pages is built on (among other things) twin pillars of trust and tolerance. The integrity of the project depends on the core community being passionate about quality and integrity, so that we can trust each other. The harmony of our work depends on human understanding and forgiveness of errors.
--Jimbo Wales 06:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Responses
With deep regret, as I have been very fond of Essjay's work, I have to agree that he should accept your advice to voluntarily resign. I never suspected you would have promoted him if all the evidence was available to you, however, I am convinced he still would have been an excellent arbitrator.--MONGO 06:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the statement. I too have deep regrets, and high regards for his work here. By resigning positions of trust, it will go along way in "taking responsibility" for the situation. I see this as youthful indiscretion -- a situation I think/hope he's learned from and look forward to supporting him as we move forward. Regards. --Aude (talk) 07:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I think the solution you propose is a good middle path. It is rather unfortunate if Essjay did not get a chance to respond of his own accord before you made your statement, but the mix of your schedule and Essjay's relative inactivity perhaps threw a wrench into the works there. I agree that all such situations should be handled with maximum carefulness and respect. Unfortunately 100 people respectfully querying your actions at the same time is bound to feel for Essjay like an inquisition. That number is only scaling up as Misplaced Pages grows. More thought is needed about how to handle events like this. Regards, Christopher Parham (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- With all due respect, I'm not sure that there is another plausible or responsible course for Jimbo (or the community) to take in this scenario. This is it. I say that as a humongous fan of Essjay's who hopes that he sticks around and keeps contributing. He's given a lot to the project, and he has more to give. He's lost a lot of trust and respect right now, but, judging from his prior work, he'll get it back. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 07:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the statement. Stepping down from his roles may be hard for Essjay, but it's the right thing to do. And as Bbatsell has said, he can easily gain this trust back. Natalie 07:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you, Jimbo. I sadly believe that Essjay voluntarily resigning from his posts of authority is the best course of action, both for him and for Misplaced Pages. This affair had shaken my faith in the moral underpinnings of Misplaced Pages; this statement goes some distance towards restoring it. I hope that now we can all move forward and begin to heal. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a good decision, and it will answer the community's concerns. Now all we have to do is convince the outside world that this is not the normal way of things in this project. It's the outside world that we depend on for recruitment, support and money, and we have to stop pretending that we're not subject to real-life ethical (and in case of faked academic credentials, possibly legal) standards. Zocky | picture popups 07:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well said, Zocky. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Likewise, Jimbo. I do agree with others who say Essjay could earn back trust and meanwhile I leave drawing any helpful, pithy lessons from this to you. So far as "the outside world" goes I think the lines are wholly blurred but you know that. Gwen Gale 07:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Jimbo. I support your decision and in the spirit of reconciliation I have suggested to Essjay that he improve a particular article. Durova 07:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
If your are still online, a closure of the Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Essjay might be nice to kill it dead. Teke 07:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree. I think we still need to hear a response from Essjay. I'm willing to move forward, but not without an appropriate statement from Essjay on the entire matter. Closing the RfC now would be premature. —Doug Bell 07:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Jimbo, thanks for clearing this up on your end, and thank you for taking the time to reply to my email. I'm glad that you don't condone this. This has been a troublesome period, but hopefully everyone can move on, and Essjay will eventually get what positions he needs back. – Chacor 07:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I find this episode terribly sad, but I agree that you had no choice but to ask Essjay to resign his positions. I too recognize Essjay's positive contributions and while he has fallen a long distance, I too hope that he continues to contribute as an ordinary user. But while I wish to encourage healing the wounds, I just left some comments expressing the hope that by further discussion of how this situation came about, the Misplaced Pages community can examine what changes may be needed to policies and customs regarding anonymity and other practices which, I fear, tend to promote deception and lack of accountability. ---CH 08:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Attn: New Yorker
- Jimbo, you wrote,"I understood this to be primarily the matter of a pseudonymous identity (something very mild and completely understandable given the personal dangers possible on the Internet) and not a matter of violation of people's trust. I want to make it perfectly clear that my past support of EssJay in this matter was fully based on a lack of knowledge about what has been going on."
- This, along with the letter to the professor, is what did it for me, and I have no doubt that, as you say, you were not aware of these when you'd made your earlier statement.
- Though it may seem counterintuitive, I recommend that you or someone in your trust contact the New Yorker, and point them to the relevant RfC. It will show them that we well understand - overwhelmingly in fact - the difference between pseudonymity and the abuse of false credentials. One may contrast this with similar examples in academia (see Ward Churchill) which took years to act upon, the responses to which included a great deal more ambiguity and excuse-making than is found here.Proabivouac 07:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- It's a little difficult to square "I want to make it perfectly clear that my past support of EssJay in this matter was fully based on a lack of knowledge about what has been going on. Even now, I have not been able to check diffs, etc." with (on 1 March): "Essjay has always been, and still is, a fantastic editor and trusted member of the community. He apologized to me and to the community for any harm caused. Trolls are claiming that he "bragged" about it: this is bullshit. He has been thoughtful and contrite about the entire matter and I consider it settled." Especially difficult to reconcile in view of the very strong language used to support User:Essjay. The earlier remarks suggest knowledge of at least some of the issues. --luke 08:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think the professor also needs an explanation and apology, rather than finding out about all this through some other means. Tyrenius 07:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Stopping by
The politics never seem to end. Just wanted to stop in and say hi Jimbo. I'm really impressed with Misplaced Pages and I've having a blast. See you on the Web 2.0. Mkdw 06:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Cautious Thank You
Thanks for the statement - and i'm glad you've put on record your thoughts. However, just for the record really, you mention that essjay was contrite and apologetic at all times, which i'm afraid isn't entirely true - i had tried for a couple of weeks to raise the issue politely and calmly, and felt very brushed off in response - no contrition or apology was offered to me. Hopefully essjay will be able to step back gracefully for a while, and continue the amazing work he does around here - and as I mentioned to him, maybe this is a beginning, not an end... Purples 07:23, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Considering the nasty way you put everything, I'm not sure you deserve an apology. pschemp | talk 07:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- <personal attack by anon removed>,
- Though, I consider your remark a borderline personal attack also. Let's all be civil, drop such remarks, and lets please move forward. --Aude (talk) 08:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)