Compelling Villain

When someone in CategoryPest? turns up, we rely on our faithful WikiGnomes to show them the path to GoodWikiCitizenship.

But they won't go of their own accord. They need a stick to go with the carrot: a brutish Joe Frazier to encourage them to channel their aggression into the benevolence of a Muhammad Ali, A vitriolic RichardKulisz to shame them into appreciating the silence of a WardCunningham.

Such transformations don't occur overnight. But to have any chance of success your RolledUpNewspaper needs a DramaticIdentity on Wiki, a CompellingVillain, or it will appear as random violence and so have no effect.

DrWiki: Good day. How may I help you?

Joe: Doctor, I am terribly worried. I've always been a good WikiZen in the past, but lately, I've become obsessed with rebutting the postings of a certain other poster.

DrWiki: Go on...

Joe: Well, it started out when I posted a statement in the FooLanguage? page about how BlubLanguage? had a certain facility that would have made a certain bug... I mean, design feature in FooLanguage? unnecessary. This person was on me for it immediately! He called me a language bigot, insisted that I didn't know what I was talking about, insulted my family background and called me a worthless fascist thug and a waste of skin!

DrWiki: And how did that make you feel?

Joe: At first, I felt horrible about it. I mean, I didn't really know FooLanguage? that well, so I thought, maybe he's right about that. But the way he went on and on with attacking me, and never justifying his position, made me angrier and angrier the more I read!

DrWiki: Were you angry with yourself for making a mistake, or with him for attacking you over it?

Joe: With myself, at first. That I could make such a simple mistake - or what he said was a simple mistake - seemed humiliating. But when I tried asking why he thought I was so wrong, he just kept slamming me with more and more personal taunts. I began to realize that he didn't have anything backing up his claims. I felt like I was being abused for no reason! So I... lashed out.

DrWiki: In what way did you lash out?

Joe: Well, it started with a snide comment on a page dedicated towards taunting this person. When I saw it, I felt so vindicated! It seemed to me that anyone who was so hated must be wrong.

DrWiki: So you justified you feelings against him because of popular dislike? I would like to get back to that at another time, but for now, let's continue with what you did next.

Joe: Well, Doctor, being able to vent that way left me feeling so empowered that soon afterwards, whenever I saw him posting on a page I was reading, I immediately posted a rebuttal, even if I didn't know anything about the topic. His heated replies just goaded me into further postings of my own.

DrWiki: Was that all that you did?

Joe: That was only the beginning. Pretty soon I was scrawling hate-messages on his home page. It's no gotten so bad that I've been cruising the RecentChanges for his name, just so I can pounce on him whenever he posts anywhere on the Wiki! I'm so obsessed that I'm getting no work done, and I can hardly sleep any more!

DrWiki: I see. Well, Joe, it seems to me that your behavior is rooted in unresolved conflicts over the original dispute. When this other person rebutted your original posting, you felt ashamed because of the mistake you thought you had made. Then, when you realized that the rebuttal was not solidly defended, you felt further humiliation at the possibility that you had been deceived by someone who was not the expert they claimed to be. But this only exacerbated the feelings of doubt created by the original rebuttal, since you now were in a state of uncertainty whether you were wrong or not.

Joe: I think I see what you mean... but what do I do about it?

DrWiki: What you have to realize is that just because someone asserts their expertise on a topic does not automatically make them correct. Conversely, posting something that is incorrect is not something to be feared; we are all human, after all, and mistakes can be made by anyone. Wiki is as much a dialogue as it is a source of facts; the ThreadMode, while often rancorous and source of editing problems, is a means by which greater understanding of a topic can be found, and for consensus to be reached. So, by posting erroneous statement,s you are actually helping both yourself and others come to the truth.

Joe: But what of the other poster?

DrWiki: He is only one voice among the many which make up the Wiki. In any community, there are those who see themselves as superior to others, or who delight in disrupting things for it's own sake. Such people are better ignored, as responding to them only encourages their own problem behavior. By letting him get to you, you are validating his self-worth by giving him a reason to see himself as a 'misunderstood genius'. This reinforces a co-dependent pattern which drives him to become more and more vicious towards those he deems his inferiors. By letting go of your own obsession, you are removing his power over you.

Joe: Can it really be that simple?

DrWiki: The answers are often simple, Joe, but making them work can be very difficult. I recommend that, if you feel the need to rebut something this poster has said, that you instead find some other topic to read up on, until the feeling passed and you can read the original page again while disregarding what he's written. Also, do not rebut his postings - or anyone else's - until you are certain that you have understood what they are trying to say, and then only respond to actual content, not screeds or ad hominem attacks. If you do end up responding to him, don't let it get you down; backsliding is a part of problems like this one. I will schedule another session in two weeks for us to follow up on this. That will be $75, please see my receptionist about the bill.

[If there is a more appropriate place for this, feel free to move it.]