Eric Corbett wrote:I can say quite categorically though that you'll never see me at sucks.
COWARD
Eric Corbett wrote:I can say quite categorically though that you'll never see me at sucks.
ericbarbour wrote:lol, Tim talks like the usual Tim, repetitively. "WIKI IZ MAGIC yeah it has a lot of problems BUT MAGIC"
And no one else from WO shows up. Knew that would happen.
PS which thread triggered this? Oh, got it:
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=8&t=9830
You have to log in to see it so it's not really "public" anyway. Did Jake move it?
ericbarbour wrote:PS which thread triggered this? Oh, got it:
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=8&t=9830
You have to log in to see it so it's not really "public" anyway. Did Jake move it?
Carrite wrote:Is it MAGIC? Uhhh, no. But it is a heavily used and generally well regarded public resource of passable accuracy on most topics.
I'll state that as an axiom.
Anyway, the choices are either (a) addressing WP's problems; (b) ignoring WP's problems; or (c) shaving one's head and praying for the millennium in which a vengeful neon Jesus comes back to earth to smite Jimmy Wales and his foul project.
Carrite wrote:ericbarbour wrote:lol, Tim talks like the usual Tim, repetitively. "WIKI IZ MAGIC yeah it has a lot of problems BUT MAGIC"
And no one else from WO shows up. Knew that would happen.
PS which thread triggered this? Oh, got it:
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=8&t=9830
You have to log in to see it so it's not really "public" anyway. Did Jake move it?
WP powers much of your Google info boxes, your Siri and sundry products, helps turn 1/8th educated college students into 1/5th educated college students, and answers mundane questions and settles bar bets around the world. I trust you'll give me WIKI IZ IMPORTANT.
Is it MAGIC? Uhhh, no. But it is a heavily used and generally well regarded public resource of passable accuracy on most topics.
I'll state that as an axiom.
I'm not quite sure what CN is on about about re: Wikipedia benefiting me personally. Sure Newspapers.com and JSTOR are swell, so I guess I'm cashing in on the gravy train to the tune of about $15 a month — which I suspect those entities DONATE to WP so they're quite possibly not actually spending bucks to deliver said value.
Putting that into perspective: that's a fantastically small percentage of my "information acquisition" budget every month — this month which includes $715 to New York Public Library to microfilm, $225 to Bolerium for a couple pamphlets and a couple books, $125 to some reprint house in India for a little stack of old socialist reprint books, and so on and so forth... We won't even talk about amortizing the hardware... It's safe to say I spend five times as much of my own money in order to contribute crap to WP than they spend on me to help me contribute crap to WP.
Anyway, the choices are either (a) addressing WP's problems; (b) ignoring WP's problems; or (c) shaving one's head and praying for the millennium in which a vengeful neon Jesus comes back to earth to smite Jimmy Wales and his foul project.
I vote for option A. Your mileage may vary.
RfB
ericbarbour wrote:Carrite wrote:Is it MAGIC? Uhhh, no. But it is a heavily used and generally well regarded public resource of passable accuracy on most topics.
I'll state that as an axiom.
And I've already said, there is considerable good content there. Mostly written by average people who were snookered by the Wales-Hellmouth and his dedicated gang of usually-incompetent shitbirds. The content writers were usually unconnected to the corrupt inner circle. But how does Joe Blow figure out which is trustworthy content and which is "stepped on"? He can't. Google is making the choice for him (whilst shoveling millions of $$$ at the WMF) and that's not a good thing. Be sure to point that out if you ever waste your time on Wikimedia IRC channels with shitbirds, please.
Thank you, because no one else will say it.Anyway, the choices are either (a) addressing WP's problems; (b) ignoring WP's problems; or (c) shaving one's head and praying for the millennium in which a vengeful neon Jesus comes back to earth to smite Jimmy Wales and his foul project.
Got too many neon Jesuses already--also ineffective. And clearly no one wants to see a book about the problems, because Ed and I tried it. No one wanted to publish it--or even be the agent. Jimbo and Co. got them all doing the chicken.
Randy from Boise wrote:
I'm not fighting anybody. I think CN needs to attenuate the tone a little bit, but that board is a perfect foil for him and that he's a good researcher and is regularly a fun read.
I agree with the observation that EB should go the DIY route with his book. He's already nearly five years late doing that, I feel.
tim
P.S. I wish that my posts there didn't vanish to moderation for review before becoming visible. But: their house, their system.
Dysklyve wrote:You need a minimum number of posts before the board will stop moderating you, I can't remember the exact number you need though.
I'm not quite sure what CN is on about about re: Wikipedia benefiting me personally.
Why would they pay you anything? Specifically you. If the WMF were to start paying editors, surely the ones who have made sure that 0.1% of Wikipedia meets the FA standard would be first in line? Any other measure of quality, is surely heretical.....It's safe to say I spend five times as much of my own money in order to contribute crap to WP than they spend on me to help me contribute crap to WP.
Yes, but what are you actually doing to address those problems? (don't make me ask for a third time.....)Anyway, the choices are either (a) addressing WP's problems; (b) ignoring WP's problems; or (c) shaving one's head and praying for the millennium in which a vengeful neon Jesus comes back to earth to smite Jimmy Wales and his foul project.
I vote for option A.
CrowsNest wrote:Yeah, they only want the public forum to be used for serious Wikipedia criticism.
It might happen too, if they a) find some members who are serious critics, and b) hire some moderators to clear out the daily sludge of off topic shite, which is at least half of their current churn, and affects seemingly every single thread.