How to spot a cabal

Image via Wikipedia(This used to be in my user space, for a few hours... I had it tagged as an "essay")

The term "cabal" gets thrown around a fair bit in these parts (the english wikipedia). Sometimes in fun (see WP:LOC ) and sometimes not.

This essay is concerned with the latter kind. Because after all, what could possibly be wrong with the BRC?

The easiest way to detect a cabal is by the actions of those you think are members.
* If it seems that they always rush to each other's defense...
* If it seems like there is a "siege mentality"...
* If they offer defense for behavioural issues along the lines of "we are engaged in important work here" or "why are you saying these things", or "you're a proponent of X"...
* If they attack anyone "outside" their circle for raising issues...
* If they get angry if people observe they may be a cabal...
* If they deny the existence of the putative cabal...

...those are all bad signs.

In the course of normal events in collaborative projects, especially this one, it's natural to form working friendships with other editors, and even ask them to come in when you are in a spot where another set of eyes might be helpful. That's not cabalism, it's defending each other and is to be encouraged. There is a danger that this can slide down a slippery slope.

We should all be vigilant against that sort of sliding.

xkcd and obsession

Sample xkcd comic.
Image from CommonsOK, so xkcd is a webcomic. If you don't know what that means, follow the links.

Anyway, the author of xkcd understands Wikipedia. Consider this comic. (Is there anyone reading this blog who hasn't seen it yet? Oh please! Cap yourself immediately) Consider this reference to xkcd from Wikipedia's Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents... clearly Wikipedia administrators understand where he's coming from too.

The xkcd author surely understands obsession. Consider this image... how long did it take someone (him) to draw that? Any why? On a whiteboard, no less. Sure, it's a great joke, but was the time spent worth the laughs? To him it was.

Some of you may know that webcomics got me more involved in Wikipedia than just a drive by fixer-upper... reading webcomics used to be one of my obsessions. LEGO still is. But over time, it seems that obsessions change and shift. What drives obsessions? What causes them to change? These are good questions. And important ones to many hobbies...

Wikipedia would not survive without a core of people who were not at least slightly obsessed with it. The same is true of many other hobbies... the NMRA relies on a core of folk who give their time and energy to an organization that ultimately, is all about something not essential to survival. But ultimately, that's a tribute to the success of our civilization. Instead of being obsessed with gathering food and staying alive, that can take up only part of our time and attention, allowing most of it to focus on what really interests us.

What are your obsessions?