Consumerium:Non-neutral point of view - Revision history

Jukeboksi: link to POVs

2004-09-23T12:00:38Z

link to POVs

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:00, 23 September 2004
Line 2:		Line 2:

	''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.''

			'''For serious suggestion of POVs look into [[POVs]].'''

	== power-driven ==		== power-driven ==

Jukeboksi: tyop

2004-07-02T19:01:11Z

tyop

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:01, 2 July 2004
Line 40:		Line 40:
	[[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.

	:Actually McFlurries are not made of syrup, they consist of [[soft ice cream]] and [[crushed candy]], [[[spun threat\|spun]] with a fairly heavy, specially crafted [[w:plastic\|plastic]] [[spoon]] --[[User:Juxo\|Juxo]] 21:48, 2 Jul 2004 (EEST)		:Actually McFlurries are not made of syrup, they consist of [[soft ice cream]] and [[crushed candy]], [[spun threat\|spun]] with a fairly heavy, specially crafted [[w:plastic\|plastic]] [[spoon]] --[[User:Juxo\|Juxo]] 21:48, 2 Jul 2004 (EEST)

Jukeboksi: clarify the definition of Kit-Kat McFlurry, since there seems to be some tension over this issue

2004-07-02T19:00:45Z

clarify the definition of Kit-Kat McFlurry, since there seems to be some tension over this issue

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:00, 2 July 2004
Line 40:		Line 40:
	[[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.

	:Actually McFlurries are not made of syrup, they consist of [[soft ice cream]] and [[crushed candy]] --[[User:Juxo\|Juxo]] 21:48, 2 Jul 2004 (EEST)		:Actually McFlurries are not made of syrup, they consist of [[soft ice cream]] and [[crushed candy]], [[[spun threat\|spun]] with a fairly heavy, specially crafted [[w:plastic\|plastic]] [[spoon]] --[[User:Juxo\|Juxo]] 21:48, 2 Jul 2004 (EEST)

Jukeboksi at 18:48, 2 July 2004

2004-07-02T18:48:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:48, 2 July 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
			'''This article is representing the [[TPOV]] almost entirely after numerous edits to [[dispute]] it's [[Content Wiki\|content]]

	''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.''

Line 37:		Line 39:

	[[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.

			:Actually McFlurries are not made of syrup, they consist of [[soft ice cream]] and [[crushed candy]] --[[User:Juxo\|Juxo]] 21:48, 2 Jul 2004 (EEST)

142.177.108.38 at 17:10, 2 July 2004

2004-07-02T17:10:24Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:10, 2 July 2004
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:		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.

			===topdog view ===

			This 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 '''topdog''' people would say that '''non-neutral points of view''' include:

	*[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;

	This "sympathetic versus critical" problem is not entirely solved by [[sysopism]] (claiming "neutrality" and claiming that whoever has [[IP block]] power, knows what it is). [[Trolls]] argue that '''non-neutral point of view''' itself is merely an invented mechanism used by others to define them as "wrong" - a [[God's Eye View]].		=== underdog view===

			This "sympathetic versus critical" problem is not entirely solved by [[sysopism]] (claiming "neutrality" and claiming that whoever has [[IP block]] power, knows what it is). There is an '''underdog''' view: [[Trolls]] argue that '''non-neutral point of view''' itself is merely an invented mechanism used by others to define them as "wrong" - a [[God's Eye View]].

	Those who dispute the ability of anyone to tell "sympathetic" from "critical" or "opinion" from "research", would prefer that this article be from a very critical POV, and consider its title to be from a:		Those who dispute the ability of anyone to tell "sympathetic" from "critical" or "opinion" from "research", would prefer that this article be from a very critical POV, and consider its title to be from a:
Line 16:		Line 23:
	''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 power-driven model has led only to years of conflict at [[Wikipedia]] and has only moved to other levels by banning [[dissident]]s like the [[Wikipedia Red Faction]].''		''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 power-driven model has led only to years of conflict at [[Wikipedia]] and has only moved to other levels by banning [[dissident]]s like the [[Wikipedia Red Faction]].''

	=== faction-driven ===		== faction-driven ==

	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:		A less painful way to express the above debate, and make wiki structure and titling less dependent on "which faction is in charge right now", 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 27:		Line 34:
	''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.

142.177.108.38: now actually approaches the complexity of this badly named debate

2004-07-02T17:08:35Z

now actually approaches the complexity of this badly named debate

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:08, 2 July 2004
Line 8:		Line 8:
	*[[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:		This "sympathetic versus critical" problem is not entirely solved by [[sysopism]] (claiming "neutrality" and claiming that whoever has [[IP block]] power, knows what it is). [[Trolls]] argue that '''non-neutral point of view''' itself is merely an invented mechanism used by others to define them as "wrong" - a [[God's Eye View]].

			Those who dispute the ability of anyone to tell "sympathetic" from "critical" or "opinion" from "research", 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. The power-driven model has led only to years of conflict at [[Wikipedia]] and has only moved to other levels by banning [[dissident]]s like the [[Wikipedia Red Faction]].''

	=== faction-driven ===		=== faction-driven ===

142.177.108.38 at 17:05, 2 July 2004

2004-07-02T17:05:25Z

142.177.108.38 at 17:02, 2 July 2004

2004-07-02T17:02:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:02, 2 July 2004
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 ===

	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:		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:

	*[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; [[~~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 it presently to be from a:		*[[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 it presently to be from a:
	*[[Sysop Vandal point of view]] - which is basically 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]] - which is basically 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]])

			=== faction-driven ===

			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
	* [[Multiple point of view]] - articles where [[faction]] differences are overt		* [[Multiple point of view]] - articles where [[faction]] differences are overt

	~~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~~.		Articles might then be divided among a [[Consumerium:Greens\|Green]] or [[Consumerium:Pinks\|Pink]] or [[Consumerium:Red\|Red]] point of view, depending on the factions, but are not reduced to "sympathetic/critical" or "consensual/multiple" as these are not axes that are derived from real values.

	Articles might then be divided among a [[Consumerium:Greens\|Green]] or [[Consumerium:Pinks\|Pink]] or [[Consumerium:Red\|Red]] point of view, depending on the factions, but are not reduced to "sympathetic/critical" or "consensual/multiple" as these are not axes that are derived from real values.		=== 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.

142.177.108.38: the title makes this article stupid - trying to fix it and explain reality, which is faction - coloured

2004-07-02T16:59:28Z

the title makes this article stupid - trying to fix it and explain reality, which is faction - coloured

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:59, 2 July 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''~~Non-neutral points of view~~'~~'' include:~~		''This article is disputed as being absolute nonsense due to its stupid title.''

	*[http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Sympathetic_point_of_view Symphatetic point of view], which is said to be implemented in [[Wikinfo]], a [[fork]] of [[Wikipedia]]		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:
	*[[Critical point of view]] - ~~opposite of~~ [[~~Admiring~~ point of view]] ~~- these will be expressed in~~ [[~~Opinion Wiki~~]]
	*[[Sysop Vandal point of view]] - which is ~~basically~~ defined by ~~[[trollist]]s as "we have more advanced weapons then thou point~~ of ~~view" - This will be claimed by~~ [[~~trollist~~]]s ~~to prevail in~~ [[~~Publish Wiki~~]] ~~no matter what we do~~
	*[[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]])~~
	* [[Consensual point of view]]
	* [[Multiple point of view]]

	'''~~See also:~~'''		*[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:
	*[[~~NPOV~~]]		*[[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 it presently to be from a:
	*[[Governance by Kit-Kat McFlurry]]		*[[Sysop Vandal point of view]] - which is basically 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]])
			* [[Consensual point of view]] - articles where [[faction]] differences are muted
			* [[Multiple point of view]] - articles where [[faction]] differences are overt

			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.

			Articles might then be divided among a [[Consumerium:Greens\|Green]] or [[Consumerium:Pinks\|Pink]] or [[Consumerium:Red\|Red]] point of view, depending on the factions, but are not reduced to "sympathetic/critical" or "consensual/multiple" as these are not axes that are derived from real values.

			[[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.

Jukeboksi: moved to Consudev:-namespace

2004-07-02T16:25:07Z

moved to Consudev:-namespace

New page

'''Non-neutral points of view''' include:

*[http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Sympathetic_point_of_view Symphatetic point of view], which is said to be implemented in [[Wikinfo]], a [[fork]] of [[Wikipedia]]
*[[Critical point of view]] - opposite of [[Admiring point of view]] - these will be expressed in [[Opinion Wiki]]
*[[Sysop Vandal point of view]] - which is basically defined by [[trollist]]s as "we have more advanced weapons then thou point of view" - This will be claimed by [[trollist]]s to prevail in [[Publish Wiki]] no matter what we do
*[[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]])
* [[Consensual point of view]]
* [[Multiple point of view]]

'''See also:'''
*[[NPOV]]
*[[Governance by Kit-Kat McFlurry]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:05, 2 July 2004
Line 8:		Line 8:
	*[[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 ~~it presently~~ to be from a:		[[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]] - ~~which is basically~~ 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.''

	=== faction-driven ===		=== faction-driven ===

	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:		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 20:		Line 22:

	Articles might then be divided among a [[Consumerium:Greens\|Green]] or [[Consumerium:Pinks\|Pink]] or [[Consumerium:Red\|Red]] point of view, depending on the factions, but are not reduced to "sympathetic/critical" or "consensual/multiple" as these are not axes that are derived from real values.		Articles might then be divided among a [[Consumerium:Greens\|Green]] or [[Consumerium:Pinks\|Pink]] or [[Consumerium:Red\|Red]] point of view, depending on the factions, but are not reduced to "sympathetic/critical" or "consensual/multiple" as these are not axes that are derived from real values.

			''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.