Slashdot Mirror
The Register Exposes More Wikipedia Abuse
cyofee writes "The Register has up another article exposing abuse of Wikipedia's policies and processes. It tells a tale of a man, Gary Weiss, controlling the Wikipedia article about himself and his enemies (one of Wikipedia's biggest taboos) all under the blessing of the Wikipedia Cabal. A man who attempted to expose the affair on Wikipedia, along with his his entire IP range (some 1000 homes), was permanently blocked. This comes only days after the affair of the Secret Mailing list."
A good idea corrupted by human execution.
There is this thing called "Grammar" which tells me that the above sentence completely lacks meaning, as it has no subject. I'll assume you're talking about WP.
Let's explore this idea of "human execution." What type of execution are you saying would be better? Not many projects of this sort that aren't executed by humans, at least in our experience, and it turns out that a number of human executed projects (including WP) have turned out pretty well, so human influence is not obviously all-corrupting. Also, it turns out that corruption isn't exactly a slippery slope...Even if you become corrupt, you don't have to stay that way.
So basically you wrote a sentence fragment that paraphrases a fatuous truism. That's fine. The problem is when you then turn around and complain because someone "stole your idea" when they actually write something that's not so non-specific as to be meaningless. That's pretty lame.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Shows how highly you think of Wiki, eh?
I think Wiki has a good deal of credibility, and the Register slightly less. That still means the Register has a pretty good record, but contains, like Wiki, the odd spurious hack job.
Stop thinking in dualities. There's a whole spectrum of quality to work with. Saying an entity has less credibility doesn't mean it has NO credibility. Just less.
--
Toro