next »

[superabound]

I was very suspicious of the move of the wiki in my field (ecology) to the wiki scratchpad site. It was repeatedly claimed that our job wiki page had been attacked, but I don't think it's true and then the transition was done with strong-arm tactics. Even today some people are maintaining the old site and someone in the field has tried to browbeat and then deleted the information (but it was saved in a text file). So, the whole thing seems weird to me, BUT the old wiki site does have some terrible software. The inability to revert to old pages makes the whole wiki approach too vulnerable to vandals and jerks.

I chalk it up to people who wanted control (not the financial conspiracy theory) and wanted their way. Our sleepy but effective little wiki has turned into a behemoth with polls and constantly evolving formats. Damn I need to get a tt job so I don't have to look at it next year.

[genie]

I am frankly mystified at the complaints that seem to be coming out, not about the vandalism, but about the building of new wikis. The whole point is we can all build our own wiki if we choose to. Don't complain because some other people have built a free wiki that you happen not to like.

I also find these complaints perplexing for the same reasons.

I don't get most of the conspiracy theories either. For example, this:

considering it has happened periodically over the years, I suspect it is someone who thinks that somehow they are keeping a post secret from the world who have not applied for it yet.

This makes no sense. Job ads are available in a number of venues, ranging from free, public sites like the CHE and departmental websites to subscription-based sites for professional organizations. The number of job seekers who use the wiki(s) are a fraction of the total. To suggest that removing posts from the wiki(s) to keep prospective applicants in the dark when those same prospective applicants have numerous means to locate job ads is just nonsensical.

[titania]

This makes no sense. Job ads are available in a number of venues, ranging from free, public sites like the CHE and departmental websites to subscription-based sites for professional organizations. The number of job seekers who use the wiki(s) are a fraction of the total. To suggest that removing posts from the wiki(s) to keep prospective applicants in the dark when those same prospective applicants have numerous means to locate job ads is just nonsensical.

I have actually used to wiki - at least the postdoc one - to look for new jobs.  Not all of the postdocs actually advertise and even those who do are spread all across different advertising venues because some of them are not very discipline specific.  I have found a couple new ones through looking at the wiki - I look for unfamiliar names and then track down the job ad from there or go to the website of that school.

Not that I am agreeing with the conspiracy theories.  I tend to think the simplest explanation is true.  But I think the wiki is also a good source of information for discovering the jobs or postdocs you might have overlooked.

[dogvomit]

I was very suspicious of the move of the wiki in my field (ecology) to the wiki scratchpad site. It was repeatedly claimed that our job wiki page had been attacked, but I don't think it's true and then the transition was done with strong-arm tactics. Even today some people are maintaining the old site and someone in the field has tried to browbeat and then deleted the information (but it was saved in a text file). So, the whole thing seems weird to me, BUT the old wiki site does have some terrible software. The inability to revert to old pages makes the whole wiki approach too vulnerable to vandals and jerks.

I chalk it up to people who wanted control (not the financial conspiracy theory) and wanted their way. Our sleepy but effective little wiki has turned into a behemoth with polls and constantly evolving formats. Damn I need to get a tt job so I don't have to look at it next year.

You must not have checked it very often then.  The darn thing was deleted about a dozen times in a single week, as were several other lists.  regardless, scratchpad is 10 times better.

[dogvomit]

Who is this "we" your talking about. I agree this is highly suspicious. The new wiki sight seems to have less information. I also posted something was suspiciously remove.

We?  the mess of people who discussed the issue on the discussion board of the wiki before one of the most recent attacks.  At that point we moved it.  then, we had to spend a ton of time trying to get the thing put together properly. 

For my part, which was a good chunk of the work, I would certainly like to get that pay you are talking about.  Maybe you can tell me when the check is coming???

signed,
still broke.

[pandora]

Maybe I could clarify a few things:  first, like others, I am very grateful to have the wiki as a resource for all the reasons mentioned previously.  And since it looks like at least some other academic colleagues have taken the trouble to make the new pages more readable and accessible, I'm grateful to them more personally (and I'm sorry you did not get a check!).  I don't have a huge quarrel with the new wiki -- but the transition, at least from my quadrant of the site, was very abrupt.  There may have been discussion about the move on other pages as a response to the crisis of disappearing pages, but I didn't see it, so it didn't seem like a communal decision.  Whatever, it's done.  The new site is certainly better for lots of reasons.  However, it's not a transparent utopia of information.  It does seem that there are some faceless moderators (who don't seem to be academics) making decisions about what is and is not appropriate to post, and also apparently with a kind of internal access to the software to be able to block some IP addresses if they so choose.  That's not enormously troubling to me, but it doesn't seem in the spirit of what the site is for.  I'd actually like to get them to communicate with us -- they might have a more useful role to play here.  E.g., my site is virtually DEAD at the moment, and I think probably with good reason.  People are not posting much info about flybacks, probably to protect their anonymity (posting is less anonymous than it seems) -- but if we could channel updated information through another mechanism, that would be handy.  Vive la wiki.

[superabound]

I was very suspicious of the move of the wiki in my field (ecology) to the wiki scratchpad site. It was repeatedly claimed that our job wiki page had been attacked, but I don't think it's true and then the transition was done with strong-arm tactics. Even today some people are maintaining the old site and someone in the field has tried to browbeat and then deleted the information (but it was saved in a text file). So, the whole thing seems weird to me, BUT the old wiki site does have some terrible software. The inability to revert to old pages makes the whole wiki approach too vulnerable to vandals and jerks.

I chalk it up to people who wanted control (not the financial conspiracy theory) and wanted their way. Our sleepy but effective little wiki has turned into a behemoth with polls and constantly evolving formats. Damn I need to get a tt job so I don't have to look at it next year.

You must not have checked it very often then.  The darn thing was deleted about a dozen times in a single week, as were several other lists.  regardless, scratchpad is 10 times better.

Nope

[dogvomit]

It does seem that there are some faceless moderators (who don't seem to be academics) making decisions about what is and is not appropriate to post, and also apparently with a kind of internal access to the software to be able to block some IP addresses if they so choose. 

I haven't seen this in my discipline.  It sounds like possibly a unique situation? 
the original discussion was on the main access page, not in a single discipline, however, I'm sure many people didn't see it.  It just seemed prudent to get the thing stable again or let it die.  If you are having that sort of problem in your portion of the wiki yo might try posting a message on the page to find out what is going on or contact scratchpad directly.  They have a help discussion board that I got almost immediate help with a few months ago.  I hope this helps. 

[whiplash]

I have tried to use the Wiki for Biology related positions and it seems that nobody posts there.  Any other science folks out there know if there is some weirdness to using Wiki to look for Biology updates that I am not aware of at this time.

[navelgazer]

New Question:

I was a candidate called to interview in a "rolling" interview process for a non-TT position. (Bring in one, if they think they can do better, bring in the next.) I did NOT update the wiki when I got the interview, but someone did, and now there is a long post (on the wiki) about how misleading all of this is, etc. Is it worth it to clear my name? I didn't get an offer--or a rejection--yet... But I'm worried it was a SC member that wrote the long comment.

[rodentmind]

New Question:

I was a candidate called to interview in a "rolling" interview process for a non-TT position. (Bring in one, if they think they can do better, bring in the next.) I did NOT update the wiki when I got the interview, but someone did, and now there is a long post (on the wiki) about how misleading all of this is, etc. Is it worth it to clear my name? I didn't get an offer--or a rejection--yet... But I'm worried it was a SC member that wrote the long comment.

I say NO. I say this because I truly think  you're being paranoid. The chances that the comment is directed at you seem very slight. The wiki makes us all paranoid, esp. considering how fragile the search makes one to begin with.

[navelgazer]

I say NO. I say this because I truly think  you're being paranoid. The chances that the comment is directed at you seem very slight. The wiki makes us all paranoid, esp. considering how fragile the search makes one to begin with.

Thanks! After all the deleting (which hit my field), I've been wondering who really cares that much, etc. I mean I care *a lot* and I would never do most of this stuff!

[heybeerman]

What's up with the wiki?  When i tried to check it last for my field (history", all I see is "middle east history 2008-2009"

Huh?  Is this a new case of vandalism?

[songsofexperience]

Which wiki site are you on? I'm not having that problem.

[dogvomit]

I have tried to use the Wiki for Biology related positions and it seems that nobody posts there.  Any other science folks out there know if there is some weirdness to using Wiki to look for Biology updates that I am not aware of at this time.

It was moved to scratchpad and over 90 people clicked in as using it.  I can only assume that the actual number is higher since many will skip the survey someone posted.  The link is in one of the above posts.  And, yes people post their regularly.