back

by Tomte·12y ago·view on hn ↗
I think that's right, but in another way Wikipedia does keep the plebes out:

When you defend a reverted change on the talk page all too often you get something along the lines "I don't care about this discussion, it was an IP anyway. Stay away!".

Wikipedians often see "IPs" as vandals and don't even pretend to judge on the merits.

Together with some "ownership" feeling that many Wikipedia users have regarding "their" pages, it makes for a very unproductive and frustrating experience for a casual would-be supporter.

Unless you're willing to really commit to Wikipedia, learn all the jargon and be a part of the power games, Wikipedia is effectively read-only.

As an "IP" you're mostly restricted to fixing typos.

That's perfectly fine, but a stark contrast to how the project is painting itself.

1 comments
Most IRL people still don't know that wikipedia is editable (starting with my flatmate, art school age 24). Granted: They just miss the point entirely and assume it's another Linux-or-Facebook free thing. So IP is very efficient for demoing: it makes sparkles in their eyes. Then the change is reverted, serious participation requires an account.

When I'm working from a corporate computer, I keep my IP and don't log in. That way, it leaves the trail open if anyone wants to trace a bias back to my company.