Talk:Consumerium Research pilot: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Since [[sysop vandal]]s volunteer as guinea pigs in psychological experiments, we need have no consideration for how the pilot project makes them feel. | Since [[sysop vandal]]s volunteer as guinea pigs in psychological experiments, we need have no consideration for how the pilot project makes them feel. By their various illegal and unethical actions they have authorized full frontal assaults on their [[repute]], and exposing of their connections to a degree not equalled yet even by [[Disinfopedia]]'s exposure of US Republican behaviours. | ||
Obviously if [[Consumerium:We]] cannot expose the real behaviour of puny trivia mongers and casual liars and harassers like [[Bomis]] and [[Wikimedia]] and do serious damage to them, then we have no serious chance of putting a dent in [[Exxon]] or | This ought to be a useful credibility war; When it's over it will be fairly obvious how to [[end Wikimedia]] and its influence, i.e. [[Bomis]]'s influence, and other corporate influence over [[GFDL corpus]]. | ||
It's a good test also of the process of exposing corporate abusers and bogus charities: Obviously if [[Consumerium:We]] cannot expose the real behaviour of puny trivia mongers and casual liars and harassers like [[Bomis]] and [[Wikimedia]] and do serious damage to them, then we have no serious chance of putting a dent in [[Exxon]] or [[Swift Boat Veterans For Truth]]. It's a good test of robustness of the overall [[trolling]] methods that [[Research Wiki]] merely amplifies: without determined [[trolls]] we have nothing going on, really. ''See [[talk:trolling]] for a definition of the '''Wikiactivist''' and the role of such activist [[faction]]s in [[text liberation]].'' | |||
Latest revision as of 22:06, 7 September 2004
Since sysop vandals volunteer as guinea pigs in psychological experiments, we need have no consideration for how the pilot project makes them feel. By their various illegal and unethical actions they have authorized full frontal assaults on their repute, and exposing of their connections to a degree not equalled yet even by Disinfopedia's exposure of US Republican behaviours.
This ought to be a useful credibility war; When it's over it will be fairly obvious how to end Wikimedia and its influence, i.e. Bomis's influence, and other corporate influence over GFDL corpus.
It's a good test also of the process of exposing corporate abusers and bogus charities: Obviously if Consumerium:We cannot expose the real behaviour of puny trivia mongers and casual liars and harassers like Bomis and Wikimedia and do serious damage to them, then we have no serious chance of putting a dent in Exxon or Swift Boat Veterans For Truth. It's a good test of robustness of the overall trolling methods that Research Wiki merely amplifies: without determined trolls we have nothing going on, really. See talk:trolling for a definition of the Wikiactivist and the role of such activist factions in text liberation.