Slashdot Mirror
British Politicians Delete Negative Wikipedia Descriptions Before Election
EwanPalmer writes: The Wikipedia pages of dozens of UK politicians had references to sex scandals, fraud and opposition to same sex marriage removed in the run up to the UK general election. Dozens of MPs had negative aspects of their online biographies removed or altered prior to the election in a bid to make them more electable. The changes include several instances of MPs' expense claim scandals being removed, as well as details of arrests and the use of 'chauffeur-driven cars.' The edits were made using computers with IP addresses registered from inside Parliament.
You assholes re-elected the torie menace David Cameron, and he is going to COMPLETELY destroy your country.
I've noticed in the past that most of those white-washing edits, especially when they're done by anonymous IPs, tend to get reverted by registered editors, so that the white-washing isn't that much of an issue.
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
Access to information is the greatest threat to rule of crooks and despots, which is why it is frowned upon in so many closed counties.
In the West? Chances are very few people will be reseacrhing online inside the voting booth. Do your homework before election day.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
'There is a Party slogan dealing with the control of the past,' he said. 'Repeat it, if you please.'
'"Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past,"' repeated Winston obediently.
Note: The general people in the UK don't vote for the Prime Minister - they vote for their local Member of Parliament (MP).
The MPs collectively vote for the Prime Minister.
So 'You assholes' is presumably only referring to the 650 (minus the Sinn Fein folk) MPs?
And you think politicians from other countries will keep their "negative" details? Ah!
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
With all the talk going on around UK's adult content policies, it was only natural to remove some social-centric articles which directly impact on public opinion. It just doesn't seem like the British thing to do, does it?
Well, I guess the way they are heading, any censorship is good censorship. Might as well make it a totalitarian state sooner better than later. How anyone in there is outraged that the EU is eye-browing such policies, that is the actual surprise... But then again, who would want freedom of speech, when freedom of speech can have such influence on these fascists jobs? It's understandable that state entities such as the parliament are editing wikipedia. Wouldn't you do anything it takes to keep your salary? Especially if such censorship action happens to coincide with your political view? Man I know I would. If my first name was Adolf and my last name rimmed with shittler I definitely would.
The alternative being a weak Labour government with its balls firmly in the Nats hands.
If there was ever an election that was a choice of the lesser evil, the 2015 UK general election was it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The root of the problem is people using Wikipedia as a research resource in its own right. It's very helpful for uncontroversial facts but horrible for anything even slightly politically charged. Wikipedia is filled with power hungry POV pushing scum in denial. The solution isn't to fix Wikipedia, it's far beyond fixing. The solution is to take anything you read on Wikipedia with a whole shaker of salt. Do real research.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
The US voters have had the dilemma of having to pick the lesser of two evils for awhile now. It's all downhill from here. May God have mercy on you.
Sorry for feeding the troll, but this site:
http://www.transparency.org/cp...
says 14th lowest out of 175 countries.
Not the very best, but certainly the odds are that you are in a country that is more corrupt.
I'm not convinced we got the lesser evil though.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
That should read "37% of you assholes re-elected the torie menace"
Hurrah for first past the post, truly the most democratic of systems.
that usally goes well for anyone using it.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
First of all, I'm not British, so I only meant this as an outside observation. I'm Canadian, so certainly well versed in the realities of Westminster politics.
Second of all, as much as Cameron may be far from ideal, I don't think he's any kind of Palpatine. As much as anything, he's been delivered the fruits of the Labour meltdown in Scotland which began in 2010 and now appears to be permanent.
I do think that the specter of a Labour government reliant on the SNP disturbed a good many English, and I think there are reasonable grounds to argue that, for England, the idea of a Devo-maxed Scotland still able to push English MPs around on matters of largely English concern demonstrates fundamental inequities. And before we all forget, it is Labour, as much as anyone, who created this dilemma by dealing with the Scottish question, and going out of its way not to deal with English question.
At any rate, British voters had their chance to pick a new electoral system that would have made the ability of any party to form government with less than even a 40% share of the popular vote far less likely. They rejected that. Coupled with what looks to be a permanent break with Labour in Scotland, and the phenomena of UKIP actually stealing more Labour votes than Conservative votes in the North, the Tories probably have a good chance of repeating the 2015 election again, providing they don't go completely off the rails. And that will moderate them as much as anything. Their first majority in 23 years is not something they're going to be keen to throw away on a pack of Thatcheresque exploits.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
If anyone can put anything in, then anyone can take anything out.
Deal With It.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Is anyone ever held accountable for libelous information in Wikipedia? Has there ever been any lawsuits over false information?
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Using Calibre and certain plug-ins, it's not hard to covert e-books to DRM-free ePub format. Of course, if you live in the Land of the Free that runs afoul of the DMCA, but that's your own problem.
No, in the UK you vote for a candidate, not a party, and the candidate may be independent of parties.
A party candidate may choose to leave his party after the election and this does not trigger a by-election, he retains his seat.
blog.sam.liddicott.com
...you don't get blocked for edit-warring until there have been three successive reverts. If there's a handy list of the affected pages I'd be glad to hop in and revert a few of them, and then bow out and let someone else hop in if needed.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
So... fascism was caused by choice anxiety then? I'd never have guessed!
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
First of all, that's the "Corruption Perception Index"; that is, it is an index of how corrupt people believe their country to be, not how corrupt it actually is.
Second, "corruption" means different things, from illegal bribing of low-level bureaucrats, to legal lobbying, rent-seeking, and even academic-honors-in-return-for-favors for high-level politicians.
Nobody has any good objective data on how "corrupt" different countries are objectively by different measures. I suspect, there is little bribery, but a great deal of rent seeking in the UK.
The AC brings up a good point. You bastards never give us a break when we have to decide between a giant douche and a turd sandwich, so why should we give you one?
You assholes re-elected the torie menace David Cameron, and he is going to COMPLETELY destroy your country.
Scotland didn't vote for them...yet we have to suffer them.. in fact we firmly rejected the westminster parties... 56 seats to the Scottish National Party.. 1 seat labour, liberal and tory.....
Apologies for the ignorance, what is 'rent seeking'?
Understand it's a perception index. Anything better out there?
The alternative being a weak Labour government with its balls firmly in the Nats hands.
If there was ever an election that was a choice of the lesser evil, the 2015 UK general election was it.
LOL.. said like a true daily fail reader!!!
That's moot. They vote for the party, which is a vote for the leader of the party.
There is no guarantee that the leader of the party will remain the same. In the past the prime minister has changed between elections e.g. Thatcher, Blair etc. In fact even during the election there is no guarantee that the party leader will actually be elected: it is theoretically possible for a party to win the election and then have to find a new leader because the one they had lost their local seat. This certainly happens with the smaller parties: UKIP's leader did not get elected in the recent election even though others of his party did.
According to bbc, only 37% of the votes cast were for the tories. Blame the British first-past-the-post system for giving absolute majority to a party supported by only 37% of the voters.
The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
Humans are the problem.
Knowledge sources can only be built through networking efforts which actively strive for truth at all cost, self-police of its membership, values multiple viewpoints in the understanding that one person is powerless to perceive reality in its totality, and is prepared to take ego hits as members put truth and knowledge ahead of personal whimsy.
The human world at large is a cauldron, or more accurately, a crucible evidently designed to purify human psyche and spirit. The action of heating and cooling through explosive action and reaction, serves to burn away the impurities over time and allow the desired qualities to slowly crystalize.
The world is a machine. A system. A soul mill.
As it happens, there is a regular and huge amount of low grade human "material" being poured in. Low grade human materials have yet to figure out the core challenge of apprehending and accepting objective reality as it stands, that there is a universe outside of and independent of the self, and that lying at the top of one's lungs, (and keyboards), is ultimately an act of nihilism.
Those that don't learn this, vanish, and those that do, eventually have it burned away.
Wikipedia is open to the whole of the the grist, so it cannot help but be a useless source of noise on any sensitive subject. Essentially, it allows the spiritual equivalent of tantrum-throwing children the same editorial power as wizened elders. How can that possibly become a reliable reservoir of pure knowledge?
This is self-evident and it is surprising that the project for an open encyclopedia was even attempted. It was doomed from the start to be exactly as we see it today.
Yet it serves an object purpose. It was and continues to be an amazing experiment which teaches people the necessity of being vigilant and focused and humble in their search for truth -if they at all want it.
Conversely, it also demonstrates the ultimate futility of trying to control the universe by lying; though this is a more selective lesson which is lost on the liars.
Except that by the time I get to vote in primaries, the nominees are often already chosen. The real way to have lots of choices is to live in New Hampshire and Iowa.
It is indeed like a runoff election that is executed very very poorly.
The winner take all system for awarding electoral votes has caused us to only have a few "swing states" that actually matter.
Not to mention the fact that the parties now control the debates (rather than a nonpartisan organization like the league of women voters). They get to decide who is allowed to participate in the debates. They often change the criteria in order to specifically exclude/include particular candidates.
If you are a 3rd party or an independent candidate, good luck getting anywhere near a debate run by democrats and republicans.
I still don't get the problem with the SNP, they are a leftwing progressive party and would be a good fit with labour (might even remind them that they are suposed to care about people who are worse off). They might also have made the UK less so utterly london centric.
If you think that a choice between Dems, who have shown themselves to be centrist, fiscally responsible and more likely to support the working class than not, and the gop, which has become a raft of radical nutjobs who want to waste the country's money on foreign wars while reducing taxes on the wealthy effectively bleeding the middle class to death... is the lesser of two evils, then you are just plain silly
Keep in mind, who put the right wingers on the Supreme Court which upheld corporate money as 'free speech' - The GOP
Who put us into two foreign wars with no long range plan resulting in trillions in debt and thousands of dead Americans - The GOP
Who left our guard down while ignoring repeated warnings and allowing the 9/11 attacks on their watch - The GOP
Who deregulated markets and created a boom/bust scenario resulting in the largest recession in 80 years - the GOP
Who reduced taxes on the wealthy resulting in deficits and long term problems like a rotting infrastructure - the GOP
And just to balance the scale, who recovered from the last two Bush-driven recessions - The Dems
If you think that is the choice between two evils, then you are drinking the gop cool-aid and need to wake the fuck up
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Coming to a Clinton near you!
Life is in a state of dynamic equilibrium, it both blows and sucks
I feel sorry for you if you actually believe this.
Don't just put me down, provide a logical counter argument
Wherever You Go, There You Are
And all of them are selected based on their fealty to jews. Just search any recent american potential presidential candidate's name plus "wailing wall" and you'll see most of them kissing the "ring" so to speak.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png