Get Widget

Should Wikipedia ban people from editing?

7 Votes
  • Start Date:
    12-5-2007
  • Last Vote:
    12-13-2007

Issue:

Controversy has erupted among Wikipedia's core contributors, after a rogue editor revealed that Wikipedia's top administrators are using a secret insider mailing list to crackdown on perceived threats to their power.

Is this merely trying to protect free speech on a site where free speech is supposedly sacred, or does the list allow the "ruling clique" to push its agenda without scrutiny from the community at large?

Belief:

Many suspected that such a list was in use, as the Wikipedia "ruling clique" grew increasingly concerned with banning editors for the most petty of reasons. But now that the list's existence is confirmed, the rank and file are on the verge of revolt.

 

29%
Yes.
71%
No.
Tell a FriendCreate a CampaignBookmark
Cast Your Vote
Forum Discussion for Should Wikipedia ban people from editing?
Submitted by Steve J. on Sat, 07/05/2008 - 15:43

wikipedia is so messed up. Some of the entries are just biased opinions anyways.

My Websites:
Apply for a Credit Card - Paid Surveys

Submitted by Gregory K. on Thu, 12/13/2007 - 18:00

This survey fails on all sorts of market research principles.  It is unnecessarily difficult for the respondent to understand what he is voting for -- comfort with the fact that there is a secret cabal on Wikipedia; comfort with the fact that there is outrage over the discovery of a secret cabal; comfort for "this" "editing" going on on Wikipedia.   I mean, the title of the survey is "Should Wikipedia ban people from editing?"  I'd like to ban the former-admin Durova from editing, so how am I to answer? Try to construct a better survey, and you'll get more meaningful results.

Loading People...