Editing Consumerium:Non-neutral point of view
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''This article is disputed as being absolute nonsense due to its stupid title.'' | ''This article is disputed as being absolute nonsense due to its stupid title.'' | ||
=== power-driven === | |||
== power-driven == | |||
The so-called "[[neutral point of view]]" is a state where all disputed statements have [[attribution]]. However, this is not "neutral" with respect to what is disputed, by who, or how often. And any neutrality is defined by some set of arbitrators or controllers, in [[large public wiki]]s this is typically a [[sysop power structure]] that uses the claim that something is "not neutral" to bolster their own power, and reinforce [[systemic bias]]. These people would say that '''non-neutral points of view''' include: | |||
These | |||
*[http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Sympathetic_point_of_view Sympathetic point of view], which is said to be implemented in [[Wikinfo]], a [[fork]] of [[Wikipedia]], which in practice could include [[advertising]] or [[funded troll]]s promoting a concept - who can demand parallel articles for the most contentious subjects be created to express: | *[http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Sympathetic_point_of_view Sympathetic point of view], which is said to be implemented in [[Wikinfo]], a [[fork]] of [[Wikipedia]], which in practice could include [[advertising]] or [[funded troll]]s promoting a concept - who can demand parallel articles for the most contentious subjects be created to express: | ||
*[[Critical point of view]] - including disapproval of the concept itself, and claims that it does not exist; | *[[Critical point of view]] - including disapproval of the concept itself, and claims that it does not exist; | ||
[[Trolls]] argue that '''non-neutral point of view''' itself is merely an invented mechanism used by others to define them as "wrong" - they would prefer that this article be from a very critical POV, and consider its title to be from a: | |||
*[[Sysop Vandal point of view]] - defined by [[trollist]]s as "[[technological escalation|we have more advanced weapons than thou]] point of view"; This will be claimed by [[trollist]]s to prevail in [[Publish Wiki]] as long as there is such a thing as "[[Opinion Wiki]]" which requires vandalism ([[sysop vandalism|someone deciding things are opinions and moving them there]]) and as long as there is more power given to old trolls than to the: | *[[Sysop Vandal point of view]] - defined by [[trollist]]s as "[[technological escalation|we have more advanced weapons than thou]] point of view"; This will be claimed by [[trollist]]s to prevail in [[Publish Wiki]] as long as there is such a thing as "[[Opinion Wiki]]" which requires vandalism ([[sysop vandalism|someone deciding things are opinions and moving them there]]) and as long as there is more power given to old trolls than to the: | ||
*[[New Troll point of view]] - which claims there is no [[Consumerium:Neutral point of view|Neutral point of view]]; [[NTPOV]] will likely be attempted to guide us in governing [[Research Wiki]] in order to avoid getting anyone's leg bitten off (ie. being [[troll-friendly]]) | *[[New Troll point of view]] - which claims there is no [[Consumerium:Neutral point of view|Neutral point of view]]; [[NTPOV]] will likely be attempted to guide us in governing [[Research Wiki]] in order to avoid getting anyone's leg bitten off (ie. being [[troll-friendly]]) | ||
''The troll rhetoric seems to arise naturally in reaction to [[sysopism]] and will probably flare up intensely any time someone makes an assumption of power | ''The troll rhetoric seems to arise naturally in reaction to [[sysopism]] and will probably flare up intensely any time someone makes an assumption of power.'' | ||
== faction-driven == | === faction-driven === | ||
A less painful way to express the above debate | A less painful way to express the above debate, is that '''Consumerium point of view''' is [[factionally defined]], and that each faction has its own POV that it can agree on ''with others of that faction.'' Each [[Research Wiki]] page is effectively a battleground for [[duelling POV]], and this conflict helps to bring out the truth - in an [[adversarial process]] such as is applied in court. Some things, like the [[process]] itself, or the existence of [[Wikimedia corruption]] may not be disputed, while others, like the role of "[[Opinion Wiki|opinion in research]]", might be hotly disputed, yielding: | ||
* [[Consensual point of view]] - articles where [[faction]] differences are muted | * [[Consensual point of view]] - articles where [[faction]] differences are muted | ||
Line 38: | Line 25: | ||
''This factional model is [[politics as usual]] as in [[representative democracy]]. It has its problems, but, it's the only thing we agree to run the world on.'' | ''This factional model is [[politics as usual]] as in [[representative democracy]]. It has its problems, but, it's the only thing we agree to run the world on.'' | ||
== consumer-culture-driven == | === consumer-culture-driven === | ||
[[Governance by Kit-Kat McFlurry]] is yet another management paradigm when whoever has [[controll]] of the [[fast food]] syrup supply and freezer gets to do awful things to whoever they think are [[trolls]] using these mechanisms. | [[Governance by Kit-Kat McFlurry]] is yet another management paradigm when whoever has [[controll]] of the [[fast food]] syrup supply and freezer gets to do awful things to whoever they think are [[trolls]] using these mechanisms. | ||