Slashdot Mirror
Wikipedia Criticised by Its Co-founder
wikinerd writes "Wikipedia is under criticism by its co-founder Larry Sanger who has left the project. He warns of a possible future fork due to Wikipedia's Anti-Elitism and he presents his view on Wikipedia's (lack of) reliability. New wikis on various subjects have already emerged, with some of them being complete forks of Wikipedia. Critical articles on Wikipedia are also being published by other sources."
I can't believe this guy is crying for some elitism. This coming from a hired gun for a smut-peddling company? Nice.
He himself admitted: "I stopped participating in Wikipedia when funding for my position ran out." Then he proceeds to blame trolls for no longer participating in the project.
Here's a tip: say something nice or say nothing at all.
Postmodernism is deader than punk. Please realign your worldview.
My job experience and as a high-school graduate and my experience with those in academics have proven that elitists are no more educated, socialized, or intellectual than the masses. Academic institutions are becoming a threatened distribution model, just like the movie and music distribution business. Nothing an academic dislikes more than a system that might make them earn their keep as opposed to their do-nothing tenures promise.
Someone that founds an encyclopedia has an interest in knowledge? Wow, get your tin foil hat on now!
Let me sum it up for you:
"I am intellectual because I use big words and criticize society. Bush = dumb. +5!"
An amazing amount of untrue drivel is 'reported in non-NNN media outlets.' Substitute in your preferrred NNN.
.
'The torture at Abu G.' is just a sticker in the anti-US/Bush scrapbook. One with slightly more durable adhesive holding it onto the page than some of the others, i.e. the Dan Rather fabrications, etc.
It's worth noting that the 'Abu G scandal' primarily was spun up in the same propaganda mill as a lot of the other stickers in that scrapbook: CBS News. Kinda the flipside of FOX News, many people would maintain.
But, whatever. .
"What's the frequency Kenneth?"
Since everyone can edit pages, and you suggest moderation, why not just let everyone have moderation abilities too? Just average the communities rating of that page or contribution to the page, and balance it based on the number of users in the community (i.e., the more people there are, the less a single vote counts toward the final score, to avoid problems like Slashdot where one single mod takes you down a point). The final score would be viewed as a general community opinion of the piece, including all elitists, experts, non-experts, and trolls alike, and taken however you want to view it.
Your name calling of the Swift Boat Veterans shows your bias. Your unsupported attack on them is a perfect example of people with your political slant. When you cannot refute claims you resort to name calling. You attempt to promote the big lie, which is a statement repeated ad nauseum, until it becomes believed. Regardless of the fact you have nothing to back your slander you will continue it and act offended when someone points out your flaws. Better yet you will then turn your vile on that person as your totally unable to operate from a factual basis.
Lastly a few will come back with links which they claim are authoritive just because they have fancy names and are web based all the while ignoring the continous slant they have always had.
Wikipedia died when the idiot leftist decided to abuse a great source of free and good information to parade their political agenda of hatred and division. Anything they can pervert they do and if someone objects they claim "hate speech" - putting a label on others that they are the ones who should be wearing.
Your type destroyed it as you destroyed other places.
I think wikipedia is all a bunch of tree-huggin hippie crap.
Obama is a twitter sock puppet