Propaganda: Difference between revisions
(clarifying - there is no exception, accusations against Wikimedia are TRUE, thus, they cannot be propaganda - and we are in the business of making true claims that others don't like ultimately) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Propaganda''' is not what we do here, although [[trollism]] to some degree is propaganda against [[sysop vandalism]]. [[Research Wiki]] may have some propaganda in it, so we work hard to get rid of it, by getting rid of the opinions of [[no body]] (corporation, ideology, etc.). | '''Propaganda''' is not what we do here, although [[trollism]] to some degree is propaganda against [[sysop vandalism]]. [[Research Wiki]] may have some propaganda in it, so we work hard to get rid of it, by getting rid of the opinions of [[no body]] (corporation, ideology, etc.). | ||
[[Wikimedia]] considers any discussion of [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] to be propaganda, because, according to itself, it cannot possibly be guilty. Of course [[ | [[Soviet Nazi Wikimedia]] considers any discussion of [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] to be propaganda, because, according to itself, it cannot possibly be guilty. Of course [[trolls]] believed the same things of itselfs, and many ordinary good people went along with the [[power structure]]. | ||
In general any assertions of wrong-doing by a power structure are considered to be propaganda by people in that power structure, whose opinions of it should not be counted. It is not up to them to say what is propaganda about themselves since they are not in an objective position. If they wish to allege some more specific wrongdoing such as [[libel]], they may of course do so, but, they will have to actually address the claims made one by one, e.g. those that [[Wikipedia violates GFDL]] or others listed in [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]]. | In general any assertions of wrong-doing by a power structure are considered to be propaganda by people in that power structure, whose opinions of it should not be counted. It is not up to them to say what is propaganda about themselves since they are not in an objective position. If they wish to allege some more specific wrongdoing such as [[libel]], they may of course do so, but, they will have to actually address the claims made one by one, e.g. those that [[Wikipedia violates GFDL]] or others listed in [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]]. | ||
Revision as of 16:56, 6 September 2004
Propaganda is not what we do here, although trollism to some degree is propaganda against sysop vandalism. Research Wiki may have some propaganda in it, so we work hard to get rid of it, by getting rid of the opinions of no body (corporation, ideology, etc.).
Soviet Nazi Wikimedia considers any discussion of alleged Wikimedia corruption to be propaganda, because, according to itself, it cannot possibly be guilty. Of course trolls believed the same things of itselfs, and many ordinary good people went along with the power structure.
In general any assertions of wrong-doing by a power structure are considered to be propaganda by people in that power structure, whose opinions of it should not be counted. It is not up to them to say what is propaganda about themselves since they are not in an objective position. If they wish to allege some more specific wrongdoing such as libel, they may of course do so, but, they will have to actually address the claims made one by one, e.g. those that Wikipedia violates GFDL or others listed in alleged Wikimedia corruption.
A better example of propaganda is the lies spread about us by the usurpers of other large public wikis. Jealous of the fact that Consumerium is actually pursuing a real wiki mission honestly and lets any contributor, including trolls, help it do so, the GodKings of such projects rightfully consider us a threat to their power, and attack us at every turn. This is good practice for the day that Monsanto accuses us of libel or that Gus Kouwenhoven complains that we have hurt his business. To prepare to deal with such claims, we must get very tough now.