This page is inIPA form.
Many people have aconflict-driven view of wiki expressed under various other names:
Others have expressedsome bitterly stated concerns about the degree of conflict and the possibility of achieving a fair treatment within that view. A substantial minority of project participants, notably those committed toantifactionalism (some would say suppressionism), oppose any voice for so-called "trolls" who contest the fairness and transparency of the process that currently exists, or (most extremely) thesmug pro-trolling troll who asserts a right to "fight back".
The numerous attempts byantifactionalism advocates to suppress theconflict view have failed, but they often succeed at hiding particular bits of evidence and testimony, or using bad page names or other excuses to delete such material from most other users' sight.Some rules seem required to ensure that the debate continues on even ground, and to preventtrolls from taking direct action to (subtly or not) subvert the editorial processes they claim are biased. These rules would go a long way to civilize advocacy of particular views.However, such rules are always evolving anyway, and the more urgent issue is how to deal with the debate onconflict-driven terms, which, by definition, will itself be more of a conflict than a cooperation. Hopefully this is the first debate that can be 'civilized'.
Every issue is ultimately and only a "Community" issue. There's no need for any instructions or accommodation for those who don't consider themselves part of our community, that being, "we, theWikipedians".
Systemic biases and other related problems such astranslation arose from failure to acknowledge that technical skills or larger vocabularies could be used as weapons by one faction against another in a political battle. Over the five years or so since they were originally stated, these views have been generally proven true, and the project has eventually had to change in the ways the "trolls" suggested.
Neutral names without the community metaphor, like "debate topics", are now being adopted to replace names likecommunity portal[citation needed] which assumed too much about users. This is a good trend and should continue. Unlike some software, MediaWiki has never used the term "troll" on its command interface, and never should, as it's a social categorization.