You know, I'm not normally for conspiracy theories either. But the evidence is pretty fucking convincing, if you only spend ten minutes Googling—or even reading the relevant back issues of your local newspaper—that Florida would have gone to Gore in 2000 had a recount proceeded fairly. Calling that a "conspiracy theory" only serves to show your willful ignorance (not that I'm not sympathetic, because hey, I really wish I could still believe in our democracy, too).
Hey, that's great! For you Westerners, I mean. Christians are a minority in China, but maybe you should go there and proselytize, and save their eternal souls. Like, say, in some major public square in the capital. I'm sure they'd appreciate it.
Please show me where on Wikipedia this policy is stated, as the closest I've seen is a section on Wikipedia:Username that says you're "strongly urged" to provide a transliteration, but mentions nowhere that you'll be shot on sight if you catch the eye of an administrator who disagrees. Someone else in this discussion suggested that the issue has recently been resolved—but as this very discussion illustrates, that's hard to believe when even the administrators aren't always aware of what they're doing.
I could go back and find out, but I hesitate to raise the issue for the possibility of being labeled a "troll" and being blocked again, even out of spite—and as I'm sure you know, this is a real risk when asking for help on Wikipedia. If you want vigilante admins blocking good-faith contributors out of process, there's no shortage of those on the block log or in this discussion.
The IP block is automatic if your username is blocked, or at least it was back when I got targeted. That's downright rude. And if it's a technical limitation of the Wikipedia software, it should disallow you from creating a non-Latin username in the first place rather than let you build up a contribution history only to find yourself suddenly and unexpectedly blocked for editing under your birthname.
Imagine if the Japanese project started banning everyone with non-Kanji names. Fortunately the admins on the Japanese project have better sense than that, and they're not as completely clueless as the English project admins when it comes to basic social courtesy.
Yeah, except for those vigilante administrators who don't seem to care what policy says, only about throwing their weight around.
This can be a problem if you're an obvs. good faith contributor who gets blocked without warning (one example of many). Where's the oversight here? How can these guys not realize that this kind of raw, unquestionable autocracy can only further damage Wikipedia's already suffering goodwill?
BTW, guess what? Wikipedia:Username says nothing about non-Latin usernames being forbidden. But admins still ban unsuspecting new users all the time for it—just take a look at the Foundation mailing list over the last couple months if you doubt.
Be realistic. Wikipedia:Username is twelve screenfuls of text on my browser, longer than most EULAs I've seen, and there's no reason anyone unfamiliar with Wikipedia's peculiar ecosystem would expect to be banned on sight simply for having a username in their native script. And Wikipedia has yet to learn that an immediate block followed by an IP ban, as if you were some sort of troll, is a good way to piss people off and make sure they don't come back to contribute.
Keep in mind you need a username simply to edit many pages, even if you have no intention of participating in discussions. Why should I, or anyone else, expect to be banned for being born with a Japanese name? Sorry, but that's completely unreasonable in the context of our society.
Because they want to promote a sense of community, where people can address one another by name without being confronted with names from other cultures that existing users can't read. What they fail to understand is that by banning well-meaning contributors left and right, they destroy any possibility of reaching out and expanding that community.
Never mind that plenty of the best contributions come from editors who have no desire to get dragged into the "community," where said community consists mostly of Talk page flamefests.
You must be joking, right? The big bucks don't go towards cracking Kelly Clarkson's latest single when it's already available DRM-free on compact disc. Much more valuable is the encryption on phone conversations between private citizens—you know, people like the President, the CEO of Exxon, the owner of Sony, his easily-kidnapped young daughter, etc. And also much more likely to be targeted by "real" criminals.
Why not Google's "I'm Feeling Lucky" with site:en.wikipedia.org appended to the query? It's never failed to find what I'm looking for, even if I can only remember keywords and not the title.
The way to express it to the suits is "DRM hurts your sales." I think that was the real thrust of Jobs's argument, that music companies could stand to expand their market presence immeasurably if only they promoted interoperability and ease of use—and that's just impossible as long as they insist on DRM.
How can you consider it the "Great Library of Alexandria" when its administrators ban on sight (with no warning) anyone that happens to have a username in non-Western script? It happened to me last year and left me with a great feeling of disgust, not to mention I lost my edit history and couldn't even login thereafter for 48 hours. And a little research shows that even though it's not sanctioned policy (does such a thing exist?) on English Wikipedia, there are enough rogue admins who enforce it as if it were policy—again, without warning or explanation—to turn off a lot of would-be contributors.
If you want to force people to have usernames in English, TELL THEM instead of banning them and then forbidding logins from that IP like a common vandal. IMO, no website so hostile to the outside world can be considered a "Great Library" of any sort.
Well, yes, it's not exactly news that Gecko (and, in Firefox, the chrome surrounding it) is rather bloated and slow. If you're after speed, I'd suggest looking at Opera; if you want speed and better standards compliance than Gecko, there's KHTML/WebKit.
Frankly, I'm not really sure what Gecko's strength is anymore, now that WebKit is open source.
No, because you don't get to be a judge if you're an autistic fucktard with an overly literal interpretation of everything that lands in your docket. Grow the fuck up.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, I'm not normally for conspiracy theories either. But the evidence is pretty fucking convincing, if you only spend ten minutes Googling—or even reading the relevant back issues of your local newspaper—that Florida would have gone to Gore in 2000 had a recount proceeded fairly. Calling that a "conspiracy theory" only serves to show your willful ignorance (not that I'm not sympathetic, because hey, I really wish I could still believe in our democracy, too).
Not that I even give a shit anymore. Just sayin'.
Hey, that's great! For you Westerners, I mean. Christians are a minority in China, but maybe you should go there and proselytize, and save their eternal souls. Like, say, in some major public square in the capital. I'm sure they'd appreciate it.
Please show me where on Wikipedia this policy is stated, as the closest I've seen is a section on Wikipedia:Username that says you're "strongly urged" to provide a transliteration, but mentions nowhere that you'll be shot on sight if you catch the eye of an administrator who disagrees. Someone else in this discussion suggested that the issue has recently been resolved—but as this very discussion illustrates, that's hard to believe when even the administrators aren't always aware of what they're doing.
"It is just amasing how little thermodynamics people know."
And it is both amazing and amusing that the most condescending pricks are, as in your case, the ones who can least afford to be so.
Hey, mods, this arrogant pissant is still at +5 Insightful? Do your job.
I could go back and find out, but I hesitate to raise the issue for the possibility of being labeled a "troll" and being blocked again, even out of spite—and as I'm sure you know, this is a real risk when asking for help on Wikipedia. If you want vigilante admins blocking good-faith contributors out of process, there's no shortage of those on the block log or in this discussion.
The IP block is automatic if your username is blocked, or at least it was back when I got targeted. That's downright rude. And if it's a technical limitation of the Wikipedia software, it should disallow you from creating a non-Latin username in the first place rather than let you build up a contribution history only to find yourself suddenly and unexpectedly blocked for editing under your birthname.
Imagine if the Japanese project started banning everyone with non-Kanji names. Fortunately the admins on the Japanese project have better sense than that, and they're not as completely clueless as the English project admins when it comes to basic social courtesy.
Yeah, except for those vigilante administrators who don't seem to care what policy says, only about throwing their weight around.
This can be a problem if you're an obvs. good faith contributor who gets blocked without warning (one example of many). Where's the oversight here? How can these guys not realize that this kind of raw, unquestionable autocracy can only further damage Wikipedia's already suffering goodwill?
BTW, guess what? Wikipedia:Username says nothing about non-Latin usernames being forbidden. But admins still ban unsuspecting new users all the time for it—just take a look at the Foundation mailing list over the last couple months if you doubt.
Be realistic. Wikipedia:Username is twelve screenfuls of text on my browser, longer than most EULAs I've seen, and there's no reason anyone unfamiliar with Wikipedia's peculiar ecosystem would expect to be banned on sight simply for having a username in their native script. And Wikipedia has yet to learn that an immediate block followed by an IP ban, as if you were some sort of troll, is a good way to piss people off and make sure they don't come back to contribute.
Keep in mind you need a username simply to edit many pages, even if you have no intention of participating in discussions. Why should I, or anyone else, expect to be banned for being born with a Japanese name? Sorry, but that's completely unreasonable in the context of our society.
Re: your sig ("I reject your reality and substitute it for my own"), is that meant to be ironically nonsensical? Or is the "it for" a mistype?
Because they want to promote a sense of community, where people can address one another by name without being confronted with names from other cultures that existing users can't read. What they fail to understand is that by banning well-meaning contributors left and right, they destroy any possibility of reaching out and expanding that community.
Never mind that plenty of the best contributions come from editors who have no desire to get dragged into the "community," where said community consists mostly of Talk page flamefests.
You must be joking, right? The big bucks don't go towards cracking Kelly Clarkson's latest single when it's already available DRM-free on compact disc. Much more valuable is the encryption on phone conversations between private citizens—you know, people like the President, the CEO of Exxon, the owner of Sony, his easily-kidnapped young daughter, etc. And also much more likely to be targeted by "real" criminals.
So instead of asking you politely, they just forcibly ban you when they see you trying contribute? Gee, that's welcoming.
FWIW, I was contributing in English, not moonspeak. It was my username that was in Japanese (and nothing impolite, either).
Why not Google's "I'm Feeling Lucky" with site:en.wikipedia.org appended to the query? It's never failed to find what I'm looking for, even if I can only remember keywords and not the title.
The way to express it to the suits is "DRM hurts your sales." I think that was the real thrust of Jobs's argument, that music companies could stand to expand their market presence immeasurably if only they promoted interoperability and ease of use—and that's just impossible as long as they insist on DRM.
Yeah, what's with all the opposing viewpoints lately? We come to Slashdot to turn off our brains, not to actually think.
How can you consider it the "Great Library of Alexandria" when its administrators ban on sight (with no warning) anyone that happens to have a username in non-Western script? It happened to me last year and left me with a great feeling of disgust, not to mention I lost my edit history and couldn't even login thereafter for 48 hours. And a little research shows that even though it's not sanctioned policy (does such a thing exist?) on English Wikipedia, there are enough rogue admins who enforce it as if it were policy—again, without warning or explanation—to turn off a lot of would-be contributors.
If you want to force people to have usernames in English, TELL THEM instead of banning them and then forbidding logins from that IP like a common vandal. IMO, no website so hostile to the outside world can be considered a "Great Library" of any sort.
I'll second that. Personally, I love the 48 hour graphs for being clean, simple, and easy to understand. And quick to load.
Yes, I think it does—and I'm a longtime Mac user. Pity the most vocal among us think otherwise.
www.pimpmysafari.com
Well, yes, it's not exactly news that Gecko (and, in Firefox, the chrome surrounding it) is rather bloated and slow. If you're after speed, I'd suggest looking at Opera; if you want speed and better standards compliance than Gecko, there's KHTML/WebKit.
Frankly, I'm not really sure what Gecko's strength is anymore, now that WebKit is open source.
Wouldn't really make a difference to terrorist militaries (you know, the ones that target clearly-marked Red Cross ambulances and the like).
No, because you don't get to be a judge if you're an autistic fucktard with an overly literal interpretation of everything that lands in your docket. Grow the fuck up.
Telling words, coming from someone who claims to host a site for "creative" "individualists." Which division of the Establishment are you from?
...if you give the remote to the robot?