This is the single best summary I've ever seen of what has happened (and is continuing to happen) at Wikipedia. I edited there copiously for a little over a year, until I became disheartened by the syndrome you describe: miscreant admins, cabalistic behavior, junior high cliquishness. It's not worth the time and frustration.
It's a stupid boss indeed, in technology, who doesn't realize that the people working for him are "smarter" than he is, on core technology. But most projects don't fail because of core technology, they fail because of BAD management. Don't just judge a manager on nuts-and-bolts technical chops. This is a classic techie error, frankly.
I've come in to interview for jobs, as an VP-level executive, and been asked really inappropriate (i.e., overly techical) questions by techies. Organizations where that happens tend to be the organizations who most need management help, frankly.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the single best summary I've ever seen of what has happened (and is continuing to happen) at Wikipedia. I edited there copiously for a little over a year, until I became disheartened by the syndrome you describe: miscreant admins, cabalistic behavior, junior high cliquishness. It's not worth the time and frustration.
It's a stupid boss indeed, in technology, who doesn't realize that the people working for him are "smarter" than he is, on core technology. But most projects don't fail because of core technology, they fail because of BAD management. Don't just judge a manager on nuts-and-bolts technical chops. This is a classic techie error, frankly.
I've come in to interview for jobs, as an VP-level executive, and been asked really inappropriate (i.e., overly techical) questions by techies. Organizations where that happens tend to be the organizations who most need management help, frankly.