User talk:Brion: Difference between revisions
(bad faith misfeatures of Mediawiki creating dependence on Wikipedia - is there a fix, or, is this a conspiracy? See standard wiki URI, interwiki link standard for issues ) |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Thanks Brion. This upgrade wouldn't have happened without your help. [[User:Juxo|Juxo]] | Thanks Brion. This upgrade wouldn't have happened without your help. [[User:Juxo|Juxo]] | ||
:Moving to [[GetWiki]] is an upgrade. Testing more damaged [[Mediawiki]] isn't, in the view of [[trolls]] anyway. Among other things the [[interwiki link standard]] is retarded | :Moving to [[GetWiki]] is an upgrade. Testing more damaged [[Mediawiki]] isn't, in the view of [[trolls]] anyway. See [[Wikimedia]] for a list of policies detrimental to the further development of the [[GFDL text corpus]]. ''Care to challenge these, Brion?'' | ||
:Among other things the [[interwiki link standard]] is retarded by failing to put language codes first, meaning [[wiki linking]] to "English (whatever)" will always go to [[Full English Wikipedia]]. This is wrong in every way - the language codes are [[ISO standard]]s and all they should mean is "in English, please". ''Is there a fix for this within [[MediaWiki]]? Gee why not?'' | |||
:And why isn't the proper [[standard wiki URI]] supported by default on a new MediaWiki install? Is this another attempt to make it easy to refer to Wikipedia articles and hard to refer to others (by ensuring their URIs will be impossible to remember for the average user, and constantly shifting with each release of [[Mediawiki]] so only the Wikipedia ones are constant)? [[Trolls]] suspect so. ''Given our experiences, we have lots of reasons to believe misfeatures are chosen deliberately to create dependence on Wikipedia and its incompetent "cabal".'' | |||
:If we see the distributed [[GFDL text corpus]] properly supported, we might change our minds. But for now it appears that [[Mediawiki]] is simply a sort of trap that [[GetWiki]] is trying to crawl out of. And we want out of that trap. We are necessarily [[multiple point of view]] at [[Consumerium]], and the ideology of [[neutral point of view]] simply doesn't and cannot apply, even if it made sense, which it doesn't. It is really all about their [[GodKing]] and what makes him personally comfortable or not, and the same is true for the features they implement, which seem to be going towards [[permission-based model]]s ''which we don't need or want for [[Consumerium Services]].'' | |||
:If these questions and issues aren't answered to, and the appropriate fixes not on the slate for MediaWiki's next release and actually working within two or three months, it would make much more sense to shift to [[GetWiki]] instead. Its developer(s) have no conflicts of interest, unlike bomis.com. | |||
Latest revision as of 00:57, 9 March 2004
Thanks Brion. This upgrade wouldn't have happened without your help. Juxo
- Moving to GetWiki is an upgrade. Testing more damaged Mediawiki isn't, in the view of trolls anyway. See Wikimedia for a list of policies detrimental to the further development of the GFDL text corpus. Care to challenge these, Brion?
- Among other things the interwiki link standard is retarded by failing to put language codes first, meaning wiki linking to "English (whatever)" will always go to Full English Wikipedia. This is wrong in every way - the language codes are ISO standards and all they should mean is "in English, please". Is there a fix for this within MediaWiki? Gee why not?
- And why isn't the proper standard wiki URI supported by default on a new MediaWiki install? Is this another attempt to make it easy to refer to Wikipedia articles and hard to refer to others (by ensuring their URIs will be impossible to remember for the average user, and constantly shifting with each release of Mediawiki so only the Wikipedia ones are constant)? Trolls suspect so. Given our experiences, we have lots of reasons to believe misfeatures are chosen deliberately to create dependence on Wikipedia and its incompetent "cabal".
- If we see the distributed GFDL text corpus properly supported, we might change our minds. But for now it appears that Mediawiki is simply a sort of trap that GetWiki is trying to crawl out of. And we want out of that trap. We are necessarily multiple point of view at Consumerium, and the ideology of neutral point of view simply doesn't and cannot apply, even if it made sense, which it doesn't. It is really all about their GodKing and what makes him personally comfortable or not, and the same is true for the features they implement, which seem to be going towards permission-based models which we don't need or want for Consumerium Services.
- If these questions and issues aren't answered to, and the appropriate fixes not on the slate for MediaWiki's next release and actually working within two or three months, it would make much more sense to shift to GetWiki instead. Its developer(s) have no conflicts of interest, unlike bomis.com.