Consumerium:Non-neutral point of view: Difference between revisions
the title makes this article stupid - trying to fix it and explain reality, which is faction - coloured
(moved to Consudev:-namespace) |
(the title makes this article stupid - trying to fix it and explain reality, which is faction - coloured) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''' | ''This article is disputed as being absolute nonsense due to its stupid title.'' | ||
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: | ||
*[[ | *[[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. | |||