Consumerium development wiki - User contributions [en]

User talk:Matterhorn

2004-05-11T00:23:52Z

Matterhorn:

Welcome to [[Consumerium:Itself]] Matterhorn. I hope you find this a good place to partcipate. Thanks for the good work on [[Wikimedia]]. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 13:06, 29 Apr 2004 (EEST)

:"Matterhorn" is a liar, and provably so. His or her lies have been answered to at [[Talk:Wikimedia]]. Every single critical comment made re: that "foundation" is accurate and is backed by specific incidents with clear evidence provided from logs and mailing list posts. Matterhorn, you are not welcome here, and if you appear again you will be [[driven off by trolls]].

:Juxo, you must now make a choice again: either you support [[Wikimedia]] or you support [[Consumerium Services]]. If you support Wikimedia you must find another [[Lowest Troll]], as no one who believes Wikimedia is honest can be trusted to run the [[Consumerium buying signal]].

:Of course, offending the [[Wikimedia]] cabal will probably get you hacked off the net like [[Recyclopedia]] was, by Starling and Moeller's friends with their crapflooding [[vandalbot]]s. The correct response to this is legal however not more [[technological escalation]].

::I leave the above here for now, so that Juxo may look at it and comment.

User talk:Juxo

2004-05-11T00:22:48Z

Matterhorn:

Helo you. What do you have in mind?
----
I just came over to look around in answer to the invitation at Wiktionary. It looks like an interesting beginning. Information overload may not give me the time to contribute, but I'll certainly visit from time to time. Eclecticology

----
I have sent an email to intlwiki-l
(the international mailing list of Wikipedia)
(See below)

Good luck and have fun.

[[User:Youssefsan|Youssefsan]] 21:56 Mar 21, 2003 (EET)

----

Hello

Juxo, a user of Wiktionary started a new site
dedicated to consumers. It is under GFDL for articles
and GPL for codes.

It use wikipedia software with a lot of redirection
to Wikipedia.

I think it is very interesting.

Regards,

Youssef
----
Glad to be here. I think this is an important project, and I'm particularly happy that you've decided to pump your research into Wikipedia. Most of my contributions will probably be on the Wikipedia end of things. What you really need at this point is two or three other serious contributors in addition to yourself. That way you can stimulate each other to work in various directions, and staying on top of less than helpful visitors is much easier. Have you ever heard of [http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl MeatballWiki]? It's dedicated to researching online communities, particularly wikis. [http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?SeedPosting SeedPosting] is helpful for anyone trying to build a new community. -- [[User:Stephen Gilbert|Stephen Gilbert]] 15:52 Jun 17, 2003 (EEST)

----

Hey Juxo, I checked around a bit and I think I can reproduce the editing problem w/ ja/zh text you were having on Wiktionary. In Safari 1.0 (v85): visit eg [http://wiktionary.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Data_structure&action=edit edit page for Data structure]... click one of the links such as 'edit help', then click the back button. Now, hit 'preview' and find that it corrupted the data on submission. This may not be the only way to do it, but it's quite consistent. --[[WikiPedia:User:Brion_VIBBER|Brion]]
----
Hmm... Talking to myself, a clear sign of insanity.

I guess that if we had enough resources we could accomondate sustainably some 10-12 billion SUs and though they wouldn't work either unless they network somehow propably mimicking formation of living organisms like one SU of one person is a cell and the cells form something that forms other more complicated stuff or something. To compensate this type of ultrainvidiula anarchy crap one could consider throwing in the [[ultra-capitalist]] concept of [[The Stock and Currency Exchange of The Planet]] that would naturally run 24/7 unless shut down for some strange reason like people collectively want to take some time off to eat and play with their loved ones. I guess that the trader/analyst type of folk don't get any good sleep or quality time with the kids in the current situation anyways so they wouldn't object to working 24 hrs a day. Hmm... since people tend to work less efficiently and finally collapse totally unless they sleep this might lead the [[Capital Routing]]-industry into the hands of multinationals, that could arrange to have people in multiple timezones, but I don't give a fuck about that shit currently and i don't know is it even an such a bad thing.

There is of course a terrible hassle to get all the owners of all [[w:Stock exchange|Stock exchange]]s to agree on how much they want from the mergers and also getting the whole when to blow the whistle on the trading thingy solved would propably prove impossible. Nations and Religions and whatelseisthere have different traditions like chinese would want to play the market on [[w:July 4|July 4]] and vice-versa so there it goes. It just could prove a uniting and interesting experience if [[consumer]]s worldwide would decide to go totally psycho on non-infrastructural services that keep on running for mystic reasons when the marketplace is closed. I mean how difficult can it be to stop building crappy shoes or something on sub-minimum wage for a while and go home to relax and so forth??? The Big Money doesn't dig this at all cause it would be just a little too simple to implement this this this... [[w:Tobin tax]] if there was this hub for transactions. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 10:39 Aug 30, 2003 (EEST)

::"Keep on running for mystic reasons"... exactly...

--------------

No one really knows their own [[faction]] until they are told about it by someone who doesn't share it. You seem to be among the [[Pinks]]. Well, that's fine, but there are disgusting things to discuss, and disgusting things to stop, and some methods will be involved that you may not want to know about.

:Now this is just the thing why I originally objected to coding [[faction]]s in [[Silly colorology]]. Though I understand it is necessary to generalize and stereotypitize things in order to stay even a little bit not authistic I still dislike being categorized like this.

::We all do. To avoid being so categorized, stay out of [[conflicts between users]]. But the second that one gets into these, one has to declare bias, and bias has to have some standard way to declare it. Let's start with biases that are obvious in the real world [[power structure]], as [[political party]]s etc.

Consider how differently the [[Greens]], [[Reds]] and [[Blues]] look at these same problems, and ask yourself if you can get the job done without them. If you think you can, well, you're wrong, [[Pinks]] have serious blinders that will prevent them from getting anywhere near [[best cases]] if they don't see that they have to get beyond their own biases.

Make your decisions, and [[troll]]s will return if they are made correctly. If not, well, trolls save everything they write, obviously, and [[Adbusters]] is trying to do a project like this too.

:Yes. You are referring to The GreenScan project. It was wery good to make us aware of them and vice versa. I'm that much of a [[blues]] person that I can see that performance increases on most meters from having competition around to kick you in the butt to move it faster ;> Luckily everything here is licenced under [[GFDL]] so even if we fail to properly implement the [[Consumerium Services]] our work is not automatically in vain and can be reused by similar efforts.

::OK, good, that's the point. We all are sometimes [[Pinks]] and sometimes [[Blues]] probably, but, when push comes to shove, we probably are one or the other, and revert to [[factionally defined term]]s of some faction or other... at least for "tribal" purposes... the tendency to form [[virtual community]] could be very constructive if we treat this "colour thing" as a sort of game.

:Defining concepts is important too, but my current stance is that now would be the time to focus on resolving the outstanding practical issues and narrowing our aim to something we could pull off in practice without getting ''engulfed in the swamp of disinformation'' and ''fatiguing out on charges of bias''.

::That's unlikely with the worst Wikipedians now coming over here to damage this project. See [[sysop power structure]] for some proposals on dealing with that kind of trash long-term, and [[sysop vandalism]] for problems that arise if you don't. This project is going to be even more sensitive than Wikipedia and could fail much more easily, especially if the wrong people come here early.

----
Ultimatum given by [[142.177.X.X]]

Create a [[Consumerium:Proposed_deletion]] page, right now.

:Nope. This is an R&D Wiki and I've made no guarantee to act in any kind of democratic way here. I'll keep on deleting [[Consumerium Data Whorehouse]] anytime it appears again because I in my opinion it does not qualify for an article name.

::So this is NOT "R&D", this is "Juxo's [[Opinion Wiki]]" ultimately? This is assuming that you understand naming and org problems better than everyone else who contributes, which is [[God's Eye View]] at its worst, and certainly not R&D. You may bring on a [[democratize or destroy]] decision sooner rather than later, which is not bad... we'll do some work to establish assumptions in common or not, and if they don't apply, well, you will have some competition. No reason pretending this is personal, or that it is not dead serious. You're a good guy, you should have a chance to make a stand on what you really believe.

I've thought about the problem of keeping [[consumer]] personal [[preferences]] safe a long time ago and the possible solutions I came up with were:

*Store the data encrypted and give the key only to the consumer. This way the data persists in the network and can be made available for server side processing (quite necessary for plain XHTML UI) and disposed of after the [[consumer]] has left the network.

**A [[right to vanish]] ? Well you over-trust in the technology here.

*Store the data within the [[Consumer Agent]] residing in the consumers personal mobile terminal. The consumer agent can then give snipplets of the [[preferences]] and other data to the network on a on-demand basis.

**This is ideal, as then you don't get into the obvious [[identity dispute]].

No one serious is going to work like this.

:Oh?

::The most serious are going to require at least a [[Votes for deletion]] page to actively debate what is relevant, and what not. Certainly on refactoring decisions/naming. Anything else is [[GodKing]]-ism or [[God's Eye View]].

Obviously, you haven't worked on large projects with many developers before, or you would know that off-putting naming is the ONLY way to do certain things, like, create '''straw man''' entities that you don't want in the final release.

:No.

::You resist because of "Reputation". You do not see the power of [[trolls]] yet. ;-)

You are going to lose control of this project if you keep this up. Let's have a deletions process like any other [[large public wiki]]. ANd, next time any ceasefire is proposed, consider it carefully.

:This is not a large wiki. We have usually way under 100 edits per day. What we really should focus on is drafting management protocol for [[Content Wiki]] and [[Opinion Wiki]]

::Fine. [[Wiki Management]] is now under discussion.

::The arrival of some of the dreaded "Wikipedians" requires discussion of some serious matters like the [[free circulation of fiction]] and [[conceptual metaphor]]. If you adopt Wikipedia's policies or non-policies on these things, you will fail. If you listen to "Wikipedians" about them, you will fail. It is that simple. For balance, these articles include links to Wikipedia versions of those concepts, so that anyone from WIkipedia who objects can research the subject and make their changes there. Until then it's fair to hold them to what is said about it at least in the text under their own control.

:::"the dreaded Wikipedians" - lol.

::::[[Trolls]] didn't say that, you did. Trolls simply think all "Wikipedians" are "dreaded". There is no subset of "Wikipedians" who are dreaded, it's anyone who accepts that label for themselves who is dreaded, for good reasons. Sunir Shah has interesting views on this and how Wikipedia has invaded his life. And certainly other people are lied about there too. Eventually someone will sue the whole mess out of existence, thankfully. No decent person wants to be a "Wikipedian", that simply associates oneself with a [[libel pit]] and a [[GodKing]]. That said, there is no need to bring those quarrels here, if you refrain from changing quotes so as to change the meaning, as you did here above.

:::::So dread [[w:User:Juxo]], he's one of those dreaded [[wikipedia]]ns

::::See [[Talk:Wiki Management]] for some suggestions regarding keeping the issues separate. Unlike Wikipedia which has abandoned its mission to be "a serious encyclopedia", Consumerium has not ''yet'' abandoned its mission to provide [[moral purchasing power]]

:::::Actually to be precise my [[Goals and means of Consumerium|original intent]] implicated in no way giving anyone [[moral purchasing power]], but increase the [[moral purchasing potential]] by making [[features|information]] more readily available. I am broke right now so i have no purchasing power thus no [[moral purchasing power]] either, but that'll change midnight when i get my salary transferred to my account :) -[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 19:55, 22 Dec 2003 (EET)

::::, and until it does, [[trolls]] will fight to keep it on track and prevent it from becoming another noxious "[[virtual community]]" <-- note, ALL "virtual community" is noxious, there is no such thing as a "noxious virtual community", since that's simply redundant. You may agree or disagree but you may not represent us as having propagated the concept of a "noxious virtual community", since that allows for a NON-noxious one. See?

:::Thanks for your welcome Juxo. :) [[User:Angela|Angela]] 02:55, 22 Dec 2003 (EET)

::::The arrival of one "Angela" necessitates some policy proposals to deal with "Angelas in general", e.g. [[sysop vandalism]]. Those proposals are now roughed out, in [[sysop power structure]] (some [[best cases]] in there), [[democratize or destroy]] (to head off some [[worst cases]], recruit the better Wikipedia contributors to intimidate the worst away), with other proposals like [[use real names]] and such. Trolls will not interfere if Angela wants to say something intelligent about those. If she engages in the mindless sabotage she practiced on other wikis, however, it's revert time.

:She chose to say nothing intelligent, but only to suck up to you by using a single phrase she knows in your language. This is typical behaviour for her. Good riddance. Those who suck up to authority are going to be a special kind of problem here, there is no need to invite it early.

----
What is this place? Lir (wiki) [[User:67.1.101.21|67.1.101.21]]

:It isn't a "place". It's supposed to be a service emphasizing accountability and transparency with a [[sysop power structure]] committed to same.

-------------

http://www.wikitravel.org/en/article/Consumerium
suggests Consumerium and Wikitravel may work together. Please review and add what you can to it. Probably all the links mentioned are important, perhaps we need a brainstorm about this, including people who've been in both projects...?

You should lead that, as you're the most visible figure and have an identity.
----
== A personal story and a request for Juxo ==

A couple years ago, I was personally involved in an effort to create a database of hardware that was compatible with free software (i.e. does it have open specs? does it have drivers? are they released as free software or binary? etc.) A whole bunch of software people got involved. They started designing a database--should we use a relational database or an object database? We should let people input all the components of their computer and see whether they're compatible. They had design discussions, built software prototypes, etc. At this point, they got a personal rebuke from Richard Stallman: you've been working for six months on a database of hardware compatibility, and all you've produced was a piece of software. The project fell apart, because they had no idea how to proceed on to the only important part: gathering the data.

The moral of my story is that, while implementing barcode scanning is fun, it leaves the hardest and most important part of the problem (getting data about companies, products, etc.) totally untouched. This is the only part of the problem I want to touch, at least for now. I want to gather data, from all the sources on the [[essential projects]] and [[interesting projects]] and many other places. Is there any way that you can provide me an area where I can start on this?

::[[barcode]] scanning was an essential requirement back in the day when the [[Goals and means of Consumerium|original concept]] saw the daylight. It was inspired by information on [[Bluetooth]] since the greed and stupidity of [[mobile operators]] was proven in the [[UMTS]]-auctions that backfired seriously damaging the telecoms sector and the sinking ship took a lot of IT-companies with it leaving lot's of people unemployed. With [[bluetooth]] one needs no central operator and operating bluetooth links costs nothing.

::The basic problem in being a [[conscientious consumer]] here-and-now is that most of the staff at stores may be part-time workers (working in stores is common with students) or they just don't have the means of acquiring more information exept what is written on the [[product]] [[label]]s so the idea was that if there is an [[information system]] dedicated to storing information that does not fit on the label or just isn't the kind of information that [[producer]]s want to include in the labels or totally different media such as [[video]] or [[audio]] then [[Consumer]]s know that they or the store staff '''can access''' so the [[motivation]] behind starting to develop this information system we call [[Consumerium]] for the time being.

::In Information Technology there is a word '''interrogate''' that is used to express queries into a database ie. ''interrogating the db'' which is what you could do with [[Consumerium]] if/when it gets built but who'd want to ''interrogate a store clerk'' over some seemingly miniscule piece of information when most likely the clerk would have to respond that '''they (store staff) don't know, and have no system where to lookup what the consumer wants to know''' --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 12:57, 13 Mar 2004 (EET)

:Yup. Propose we move what's at [[Main Page]] to [[Main Page Developer]], and create a [[Main Page Researcher]] and [[Main Page Consumer]] right now, today. And that we change http://consumerium.org [[Front Page]] to quickly direct folks to the right one, and encourage mostly recruitment of the researchers we need. DanKeshet, you were involved in the creation of [[w:voting systems]], if the logs are right, and that project involved creating many standard pages with roughly the same things said about each system. That is the same problem as the [[Consumerium:intermediate page]]s with their common [[Consumerium:intermediate page format]]. These are the pages that a [[Consumerium:Researcher]] compiles, and a [[Consumerium:Consumer]] consults. Whether they consult them in the same form the researchers compile them is not important right now, that's the [[Consumerium buying signal]] problem. We can work on that at [[Main Page Developer]] while the rest proceeds in parallel.

::Whew. OK, all there now except [[Consumerium:Consumer]]. [[Front Page]] and [[Main Page Consumer]] are more or less just invitations for our [[New Troll point of view|New Troll]] [[User:DanKeshet]] to innovate. We try to be [[troll-friendly]] here.

:Also, highly recommended to check out [http://geocities.com/n8chz/ Pubwan]. It may have good ideas for this.

== More on encyclopedia of consumer products, companies, etc. ==

Juxo,

I understand what you say about conscientious consumers and part-time workers. I have been one of those part-time workers and I find it annoying when customers assume you know something about one of the 10,000 products in the store even though you didn't get one day of training.

:In Finland people are often even shy about ''requesting'' any information from the store staff in case the store staff doesn't know the anwser to the question and is put in an awkward situation for both.

While I understand how cool it would be if the whole thing could work like you outline,

[[Consumerium:Retrospection]] offers a ''little insight'' into how the concept has evolved from a ''technocratic'' project mainly consisting of automated processing of information into a "[[wiki way]]"-direction, but it still needs tuning. I am anticipating a five to ten year development time. I hope this does not put you off. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 14:34, 16 Mar 2004 (EET)

I am not interested in working on (planning, developing, discussing, etc.) a system for accessing a database unless the database is populated.

:I understand. No-one is taking the lead to generate software unique to [[Consumerium]] so far which taking into account how radically the [[Consumerium:Retrospection|plot]] has changed is sort of a good thing because work put into making proprietary software would have stopped us from evolving the concept further because of respect to the coders hard work. But since we don't have a single line of code we are free to change the plans.--[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 14:34, 16 Mar 2004 (EET)

I am interested, however, in helping populate the database. Juxo, should I work on that database here on Consumerium (if so, where?) or should I set up a different place? [[User:DanKeshet|DanKeshet]] 10:16, 16 Mar 2004 (EET)

:Here we try to generate a WikiWikiWeb that will provide all the needed information to guide building of [[wikis|production wikis]]. If you mean [[Company]] or [[Product]] specific data, this is not the place that information will go to one of the [[wikis]] when we set them up. But sadly for those who are in a hurry it is still not time to set the wikis up because we don't have a practice (or [[instructional capital]] as [[142.177.X.X]] likes to call it) for managing the wikis and neither a set plan on how information flows and we are not even sure what should go where and do we need [[wikis|two wikis]] or just one [[wiki]].

:Information you have that might be of interest to a larger "population" then the one here in this R&D Wiki should go to [[Wikipedia]] just link the interesting articles from [[Research]] (work needed on articles listed there) or [[Wikipedia]] (when an article is fairly complete) Feel free to write new articles here. We are in desperate need of contributors that are willing to use an identity instead of horrendeous [[trolling]]. I have been making up the [[guidelines]] and [[rules]] up as I go along and this wiki is a mix of anarchy and autocracy, which won't work for the production wikis. [[Recyclopedia]] seems like a subset of the [[GFDL corpus]] dedicated to "alternative" views and things. [[Wikinfo]] might grow to be a formidable access point into the whole "encyclopedic [[GFDL corpus]]".

:'''Short anwser:''' Write it here unless explicitly forbidden in [[rules]] or [[guidelines]] and it'll flow into the right slot eventually. Be bold in creating new articles. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 14:34, 16 Mar 2004 (EET)

----

When I learned about this Wiki, I thought my first entry would be on the SINALTRAINAL boycott of Coca-Cola, since I saw no entry for Coca-Cola listed. I was distressed to later see that someone had already added information on this boycott, and you had deleted it, and that they (and perhaps someone else) had felt this was a bit heavy-handed. Of course, this is just one case, but being the first thing I come across on this wiki, it does not give me a good signal. I can see not wanting people to make direct accusations against a company being a liability issues, but there are simpler ways to handle it, I think. Like perhaps removing that line with a comment about how it has to be attributed. Since you deleted the article, I have no idea what it said anyhow, I simply have to guess what it said. [[User:Venceremos|Venceremos]] 12:30, 30 Mar 2004 (EEST)

:Yes. I deleted [[Coca-Cola]] just as I have deleted [[Gus Kouwenhoven]] and [[CIV]] because we are in a planning and development stage and '''yet''' have no [[Research Wiki]] because we haven't figured out the [[Consumerium Process]] which governs it and Publish Wiki. [[User:DanKeshet]] has started a very similar project of it's own called the [[Consumerpedia]], it is also [[wiki]] and [[GFDL]] so we consider it a friendly project even an [[Essential projects|essential project]]. According to our [[Rules]] this [[Development Wiki]] is no place to put info of companies, so I'm copying the article to [[Consumerpedia]] and blanking it here.

::I don't see anywhere on the [[Rules]] page where it says this "is no place to put info of companies". It says "Don't write that Company X or Person Y is evil." I have not written that any company is evil, I wrote that eight Coca-Cola union leaders in Colombia have been killed, which is a fact, and that the Colombian union that covers Coca-Cola is calling for a boycott until Coca-Cola "makes a commitment to respect the human rights of workers". I did not say Coca-Cola was responsible for the murders.

:: My primary concern here is that it seems to me people are being misled into thinking that this IS a "place to put info of companies" even though you say that this "is no place to put info on companies". You say that the Rules page says this, but it does not, it says to not say a company is evil. Since apparently people keep coming here and making this error, perhaps this is a sign that people think this is a place to put information on companies. Perhaps you should be more explicit in your warning. If your Rules page had said what you SAY it said, which it does not - that this "is no place to put info on companies", I would not have posted anything on Coca-Cola. You seem to have Kafkaesque, unknown rules that people who are unable to derive them from the existing rules are continually breaking, and then you draconianly delete their stuff. Perhaps you should be more communicative about what people should put up here, and what they should not. [[User:Venceremos|Venceremos]] 07:26, 31 Mar 2004 (EEST)

:::Venceremos, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, and our [[Lowest Troll]] is ABSOLUTELY WRONG here. It is that attitude which led to [[Consumerpedia]] going off in some other direction with perhaps no possibility to even collaborate on some rational standards like a [[standard wiki URI]] (certainly Consumerpedia's is a much WORSE URI even than Consumerium's ridiculous strings that change too often).

:::The [[Research Wiki]] should have been part of this project, [[User:DanKeshet]] was willing to work on that, and because of top-down ideology or lack of seeming support, he's off elsewhere. Well, fine, that ghettos this as a technology-development project that will probably fail. Only [[trolls]] really worked to build [[Main Page Consumer]], [[Main Page Researcher]], [[Main Page Developer]] so we didn't end up with multiple wikis with divergent policies.

:::Review the "ultimatum" above and you'll see it's a quite general problem. There MUST be test cases in a development wiki, else there's nothing for [[Consumerium User Stories]] to refer to. We can make up user names but not company or commodity names. Juxo wants an omelette but won't break any eggs. Time for that to end. Please stay and help [[trolls]] make this thing work.

----
Hi Juxo,

Just to let you know I have moved your Wiktionary page "Types of companies" to "Wiktionary:Types of companies" to show it is not an entry in the main body of Wiktionary. -- Paul G (Wiktionary sysop) 12:03, 29 Mar 2004 (BST)

----
Juxo,

What are your policies going to be with respect to courtesy and respect? I ask because a user is posting all manner of mean comments about me, calling me a "liar" for example, on my talk page. Is that o.k. with you? Is that a proper methods for rational discussion?

[[User:Matterhorn|Matterhorn]] 03:22, 11 May 2004 (EEST)

User:Matterhorn

2004-04-28T16:07:43Z

Matterhorn:

I am here to assist in cleaing up after the hostility of the user 142.x.x.x.

Talk:Wikimedia

2004-04-28T15:53:42Z

Matterhorn:

The specific [[echo chamber]] lies including the [[spun death threat]]s of certain "high-ranking" Wikipedians, don't need to be mentioned here, as it was not Wales himself that necessarily did this (though he doesn't stop it or keep other such stuff from happening). This is however one of the most serious indications that their management problems are unsolvable with present people involved. This problem has been commented on by a lot of other people, including James Day who says "only a fool would fail to remove obvious malicious [[libel]]", e.g. claims about others' motives, [[spun death threat]]s, as part of [[m:James explains law|explaining the many legal issues involved]] in the various Wikimedia projects.

Removed claims that [[Wikipedia]] is an encyclopedia - it isn't. A "serious encyclopedia" has no visible "stubs", certainly does not let [[ad hominem]] rule over content in selection of articles, doesn't permit massive holes in key areas to persist for years, and doesn't let the [[community point of view]] of its employees overrule the good sense of historians, mathematicians, and etc.

Removed claims that [[Wiktionary]] is a dictionary - it isn't. A dictionary must define the simplest words in terms of other simple words, and it must define complex words in terms of the simpler words. Wiktionary has no such discipline. It has no [[w:defining vocabulary]] even for [[w:idiom dictionary]] purposes.

Further, the [[Simple English Wikipedia]] by failing to use [[staging]] or to apply such a defining vocabulary discipline (which would require about 2000 words), cannot serve as a basis for translation for culturally-rich articles. So this too is a fraud.

Failing to actually BE an encyclopedia and dictionary and basis for translation are the biggest issues anyone could reasonably raise with [[Wikimedia]]'s projects, which are at this point simply [[pilot project]]s that have failed to satisfy the most basic requirements of the products they seek to replace. "Being free" is about all they can claim, and maybe not that, as it seems unlikely they can ever release a CD or print version due to copyright problems. Without, that is, pulling unethical tricks like Wikipedia suing itself, organizing contributors to pretend to fight the board, etc., etc.

--------------------
Here is more proof of Wikimedia corruption, as if any is needed. These deletions were not discussed anywhere. "Eloquence" is a [[sysop vandalism|sysop vandal]]:

*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:35 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "Wiki lawyer": content was: 'A '''Wiki lawyer''' is someone who argues the rules incessantly with the [[sysop power structure]]. Sometimes this is worse than having a [[priestly ...')
::This article refers to an previously unknown term and therefore can be deleted as something that someone just thought up and decided to write an article on

:::That's not the process on meta. Nor was the article written by the troll whose work was being censored at the time. Likewise this next one on WIPE. Erik Moeller (Eloquence) simply took the opportunity to destroy work that was offensive to himself and his chosen policies. It was political censorship, only:

*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:35 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "WIPE syndrome")
*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:33 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "Troll-friendly")
*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:33 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "Sysop power structure")
*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:32 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "Sysop vandalism")
::Sysop power structure is de facto in place and serves the majority of users just well driving off vandals and too agressive-possessive [[trolls]]
:::That is not an excuse to make it impossible for anyone to discuss such issues as [[WIPE syndrome]], [[troll-friendly]], [[sysop power structure]] or [[sysop vandalism]]. The only reason to do this is to ensure that no one ever has vocabulary to question these decisions.

*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:32 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "Developer vigilantism")
::Hmmh?
:::[[developer vigilantiism]] (yes it is one of those rare words like "skiing" that has an "ii" in it) was actually noted by [[Brion Vibber]] originally. Obviously [[Erik Moeller]] (the name he himself has attached to Eloquence) is in favour of such vigilantiism, and wishes Vibber's issue never to be discussed.

*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:32 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "GFDL text corpus")
::The whole concept of [[GFDL text corpus]] is errored in it's assumption that all [[GFDL]]'d material somehow belongs to a "corpus" that does not distinguish between places of editorship such as [[Wikipedia]], [[Wikinfo]] and [[Disinfopedia]]. All these places have been complained to be "corrupt" simply because they excersise editorial restraint so that all the noise does not render the signal useless, which is exactly what we intend to do a little for [[Research Wiki]] and more for [[Publish Wiki]].

:::That is legally wrong. [[GFDL Corpus]] does legally exist - it is that body of (almost entirely text) which permits cut and paste copying with no [[copyright]] inhibitions. Now, there are other requirements that apply to a [[GFDL corpus access provider]], and yes, there are editorial standards specific to those providers or their product. It is only when those providers fail to enforce the standards required to ensure them, that they become corrupt in the sense of [[Wikimedia corruption]]. For instance to [[desysop]] the [[sysop vandalism|sysop vandal]] or [[developer vigilantiism|developer vigilante]], or put controls on [[sysop vigilantiism|sysop vigilante]]s. It is [[Wikimedia]]'s total failure to do this which has led to them being "corrupt".

:::In any case, the issue is clearly complex enough to require discussion. If you go to [http://wikinfo.org/wiki.phtml?title=GFDL_corpus en: Wikinfo: GFDL corpus] you find they are not so dedicated to destroying the idea of one corpus with some unified standards. But they are not trying to monopolize and control the corpus - notice that Moeller himself is actually the Wikimedia representative for "content relationships", meaning, in a conflict of interest when some [[standard]]s neither Wikimedia nor he himself define are discussed.

*(diff) (hist) . . Meta:Deletion log; 23:32 . . Eloquence (Talk) (deleted "Trollherd")
::Trollherd is not relevant to Wikipedia mission in Eloquence's mind. Whether this is bad judgement is up to oneself to decide.

:::This is not the process of deletion followed generally on meta. This is a [[usurper]], usurping.

See [[m:Meta:Deletion log]]

I removed all of the following from the main article, because it is mostly nonsense.

*Refusing to release [[Most Clicked Links]] information on any [[Wikipedia]], even the small ones, where tracking this information would be quite simple, and would assist authors in supporting real end user interests.
::They are in no way obliged to reveal this information. If you have a problem with this go create a [[fork]] of [[Wikipedia]]. Some have tried it.

:::Actually, this claim is completely and totally false. There has been no refusal of any kind to release any data of this kind. Additionally, I can find no evidence that anyone is even asking for this, or
that any one has ever been critical (except here on this page) of us for this imagined fault.

*Releasing only very limited page visit information - maybe due to the performance cost it adds

::: Again, completely false. There is no truth to this at all.

*Treating use of [[ISO]] language codes in [[mediawiki]]'s [[interwiki link standard|interwiki link conventions]] as if they are invocations of Wikipedia in that language, not simply references to "that page in that language".

::But the interwiki links point to the page in another language

:::This complaint is completely incoherent. If the original complainant could explain himself, I'm sure that any such problem would be eagerly addressed.

*Banning, harassing, [[outing|attempting to "out"]] and permitting (if not deliberately attempting) [[framing]] users who point out any of the above. This sometimes reaches the bizarre extreme of [[echo chamber]] assertions being cited in Wikipedia articles as if they were true.

:The most common criticism of Wikipedia is that the community is too open and welcoming and tolerant of people who have no willingness to work together in a healthy way with others. Such people are indeed angered when, after months of agonizing deliberations and attempts to find ways to
compromise, they are eventually banned. Most wikipedians seem to feel that Jimbo has always been too lenient about such matters.

Wikimedia

2004-04-28T15:53:08Z

Matterhorn:

Wikimedia

2004-04-28T15:52:50Z

Matterhorn:

'''Wikimedia Foundation''' is a private tax-exempt corporation (IRS 501) in the US founded by Jimmy Wales aka Jimbo. It has an independent board that makes the decisions as required by law.

Wikimedia is funded by donors, and spends virtually all of it's money it receives as donations on providing hardware for [[MediaWiki]] sites such as [[Wikipedia]]s and [[Wiktionary|Wiktionaries]].
There are no salaried employees at the present time, and no immediate plans to have any.

Most longstanding participants in the [[Wikipedia]] project have greeted the formation of the nonprofit with great enthusiasm, and plans are in the work to set up nonprofit organizations in European countries to complement the global foundation. Jimbo has given all rights and ownership in the
Wikipedia name(s) and websites, as well as some hardware, freely and permanently.

One of the greatest difficulties that Wikipedia has faced is in maintaining an open and
welcoming culture in the face of repeated attacks from vicious trolls, such as the ones now beginning to plague Consumerium. Wiki management issues are complex and difficult, and there are many lessons yet to be learned.

The incredible success of Wikipedia shows that it is an excellent model for any community organization. Wikipedia faces far greater challenges than any single-purpose community such as consumerium, because by design, it draws from a very broad range of ideological backgrounds, and must be welcoming to them all. Consumerium, or other narrow-purpose projects, will likely find a more homogeneous user base, thus making governance decisions much easier. By applying the lessons learned at Wikipedia, great success is likely.

*Refusing to release [[Most Clicked Links]] information on any [[Wikipedia]], even the small ones, where tracking this information would be quite simple, and would assist authors in supporting real end user interests.
::They are in no way obliged to reveal this information. If you have a problem with this go create a [[fork]] of [[Wikipedia]]. Some have tried it.

:::Actually, this claim is completely and totally false. There has been no refusal of any kind to release any data of this kind. Additionally, I can find no evidence that anyone is even asking for this, or
that any one has ever been critical (except here on this page) of us for this imagined fault.

*Releasing only very limited page visit information - maybe due to the performance cost it adds

::: Again, completely false. There is no truth to this at all.

*Treating use of [[ISO]] language codes in [[mediawiki]]'s [[interwiki link standard|interwiki link conventions]] as if they are invocations of Wikipedia in that language, not simply references to "that page in that language".

::But the interwiki links point to the page in another language

:::This complaint is completely incoherent. If the original complainant could explain himself, I'm sure that any such problem would be eagerly addressed.

*Banning, harassing, [[outing|attempting to "out"]] and permitting (if not deliberately attempting) [[framing]] users who point out any of the above. This sometimes reaches the bizarre extreme of [[echo chamber]] assertions being cited in Wikipedia articles as if they were true.

:The most common criticism of Wikipedia is that the community is too open and welcoming and tolerant of people who have no willingness to work together in a healthy way with others. Such people are indeed angered when, after months of agonizing deliberations and attempts to find ways to
compromise, they are eventually banned. Most wikipedians seem to feel that Jimbo has always been too lenient about such matters.