Consumerium:Proposed deletions: Difference between revisions
suing for funding is a viable approach if one can count on a regular stream of offenses (e.g. by Wikimedia), and ending Wikimedia may be necessary to end their attacks and training of attacker
(suing for funding is a viable approach if one can count on a regular stream of offenses (e.g. by Wikimedia), and ending Wikimedia may be necessary to end their attacks and training of attacker) |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
*[[Ending Wikimedia]] - not a [[Consumerium]] related matter. We aren't in the business of scrutinizing [[non-profit]] organisations. We are leaving it up to each [[consumer]] to decide what organisations to trust and what not. See [[Preferences]] on this --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 14:23, 8 Sep 2004 (EEST) | *[[Ending Wikimedia]] - not a [[Consumerium]] related matter. We aren't in the business of scrutinizing [[non-profit]] organisations. We are leaving it up to each [[consumer]] to decide what organisations to trust and what not. See [[Preferences]] on this --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 14:23, 8 Sep 2004 (EEST) | ||
::Counter-argument: unless we [[end Wikimedia]], it will remain a platform for various attacks on [[Consumerium]]. The people who *promote* corporate power at [[Wikipedia]] are exactly the people who will become [[funded troll]]s that will fill [[Research Wiki]] with pro-corporate propaganda or censor the truth about corporate activities. Wikimedia is like the Al Qaeda of journalism: it trains people to engage in mindless attacks with no potential for any dialogue. | |||
*[[Suing for funding]] - this is total bullshit and is degrading to think that anyone serious about our goals would suggest such. anyways, these types of thing are not for the anonymous contributors who revel in being [[trolls]]. | *[[Suing for funding]] - this is total bullshit and is degrading to think that anyone serious about our goals would suggest such. anyways, these types of thing are not for the anonymous contributors who revel in being [[trolls]]. | ||
::Your reasoning is flawed: MANY nonprofits are funded from the proceeds of lawsuits against unethical journalists. MANY. Hugh Grant and Liz Hurley are only one good example. | |||
::If this goes, kill [[talk:Craig Hubley]] too as the only reason to keep it around is to sue for funding. | |||