There’s a very strange discussion going on at the Wikback about how ‘interpersonal skills’ or lack of them are harming Wikipedia. Uninvited company says:

http://www.wikback.com/forums/ubbthreads.p...in=545#Post5261



I’ve heard this said of Giano before, and I don’t see that he has any lack of such skills. He is blunt, and tells things like they are, tempered with a certain sense of humour, an evident kindliness, and a realism about human nature that can only come with maturity and judgment.

I’ve worked in business for a long time and I recognise types such as Giano, who are often valued in large organisations for their ability to take a stand.

I think UC is confusing ‘interpersonal skills’ with being a lickspittle. Lickspittles are also found in organisations and are often valuable for different reasons. They obey senior management without question, for example. But they are not good if senior management is looking for sound and robust advice, and an effective challenge.

Even when one has good interpersonal skills, it's hard to employ them in systems which filter out affective cues that undergird social-emotional intelligence. The lack of face-to-face communication seriously impedes the application of social-emotional intelligence, because one does not have facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, and comparable non-verbal cues to interpret and adapt to.

I am more and more convinced that the focus on "civility" is merely part of the cult mindset which is used to control any dissenting opinions as a matter of course....Giano seems like a very straightforward, articulate person to me. I don't find him to be uncivil at all, personally.

Anyone who is keenly intelligent runs the risk of inadvertently beating the other guy's brains out.

One wonders how many keenly intelligent participants ran afoul of the embedded powers that be for nothing more dreadful than beating the other guy's brains out.

Sometimes the emperor has no clothes.

...and I've argued the corollary too, that you can use the right words to be extremely uncivil, simply by ignoring questions, failing to discuss in good faith, assuming any criticism is uncivil instead of a means to resolution, drive-by objections to block consensus changes to policy and so on. One of the major failings of the civility policy is that it depends on the perspective of the observer, and is not grounded in real world norms. I also keep in mind that they can have real discussions at Wikipedia that saying "fuck off" to some stranger might be part of an civil exchange, so we can understand how far from real world norms they are.

Civility is also a relative term.

If I am discussing some philosophically subtle issue with a teenager, I will use a different level of language and logic than if I am discussing it with a full professor. I call this adaptation 'impedance matching' to optimize the exchange of useful information.

The problem with Wikipedia is that it's not only a mix of inexperienced teenagers and seasoned professionals, it's often impossible to know which is which when responding to nothing more than a few sentences posted on a discussion page.

Most people saying this are either young and have not worked, or they just disagree with Giano, i.e. they wish he'd shut the hell up. Mostly because his observations smack of truths they dont want to look at.
Yes and no. In the U.S., Giano would be head of a new business, and quite successful. He's in Europe, so he may have found another niche where new startups aren't so prevalent.

aka Kissass. Suckup. Brownnose.
Oh, ok. And who on Wikipedia likes that? Names? One big name? Ends with a "beau"?


Something Wikipedia is dying for. .... (lol, or not).

Believe it or not, we have such things in Europe, too.

Also, more mature organisations have a use for such as Giano, also (in law, accountancy, pretty much any branch of commerce I can think of, in fact). Indeed, they are probably more important in larger, mature organisations, whose actions have far more of a social impact, and whose management needs to judge that impact quite carefully. That requires a strong internal challenge to senior management, and such as Giano provide it.

I don't have a problem having good manners on the internet myself. And on the couple of occassions I've not been sure what people mean and if I might disagree virulently, I just ask them to explain a bit more for me. Sometimes I might mock people- but I'm like that in real life too- some people are just slightly mockworthy.

Giano does keep on at people- but I wouldn't say his interpersonal skills are anywhere near as bad as, for instance, Tony Sidaway, who called someone a "bastard bitch from hell.' But because he is in the clique he isn't criticised as much by that clique.

I have long suspected that a high proportion of people on WP are incapable of reacting to subtle cues about what a person means. This is often the case with some types of autism - not that I'm accusing anyone in particular of being autistic.

I don't think I'd agree. Sure, I've seen a lot of cases of someone saying something that's obviously a joke and a bunch of people have come along and responded to it completely seriously, but that happens everywhere on the internet ... ? Perhaps you could give an example of a discussion in which you think a 'subtle cue' was missed?

Nonsuble cues are regularly missed. There's a droll essay called "Friends of Gays Should Not Be Allowed to Edit Articles," It's at MetaWiki http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Friends_of_...o_edit_articles

For a long time it attracted comments that it was homophobic. For a while it had to have a WARNING: "humor" header, and continues to require a WARNING: HUMOR footer.

WikiDefender, the Borat of Wikistan, confused a lot of people.

I see it over and over again, probably a little bit more on Wikipedia than I've seen it any where else. People on Wikipedia that are sensitive this and realize that others often miss subtleties will label their comments as jokes to preempt a misunderstanding, which (if you know anything about comedy) is a great way to make a joke even funnier! (joke) Here is a recent example I just saw tonight. Now, it certainly had no potential to be a knee slapper, but the fact that the person had to think "oh, I better let people know I am joking", is an insight into the Wikipedia community.

I was perplexed by UC's description of Giano as well. It made me think of that Twilight Zone episode where the pig people are doing the surgery on the hot chick to try to make her look like the pig people, and at the end they tell the hot chick that the surgery was unsuccessful and she was still ugly because she didn't look like a pig person. I don't know why you'd have to see it after reading my fabulous description of it, but in case you think you do it is right here (with Spanish subtitles!).

In short, in the land of the pig people (socially inept), the "beautiful person" (socially adept) is ugly.

I think the same thing. There are plenty of lickspittles, but not many Gianos (as in any organisation...and that's probably a good thing), and trying to eliminate the minority here is not a step forward.

If Giano's "interpersonal skills" were used in favor of those who he's opposed to, no one would bat an eye.

It has nothing to do with interpersonal skills and everything to do with the target of his ire.

Beyond that, it is an interesting thread.

Wikipedia Review = The Village Group in the North

Similarly, in the land of the intellectually inept, the intellectually adept are unwelcome.

Perhaps that helps explain the phenomenon of "expert withdrawal" on Wikipedia.