Talk:Guidelines for claiming corruption cases in Research Wiki: Difference between revisions

    (usefulness)
     
    (fix link)
     
    Line 1: Line 1:
    If human garbage that has actually made friends with [[Wikimedia]] will back off, these guidelines can be improved to being actually useful.  The case of [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] and involvement of [[Bomis]] in subverting any attempt to create an [[independent board]] is an excellent [[Resarch Wiki pilot]] [[test case]], and when the [[Research Wiki]] exists, this case can be among the very first it deals with.  Advantages of that include:
    If human garbage that has actually made friends with [[Wikimedia]] will back off, these guidelines can be improved to being actually useful.  The case of [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] and involvement of [[Bomis]] in subverting any attempt to create an [[independent board]] is an excellent [[Consumerium Research pilot]] [[test case]], and when the [[Research Wiki]] exists, this case can be among the very first it deals with.  Advantages of that include:


    *Expanding [[TIPAESA]] form to better model [[adversarial process]]es such as [[libel chill]] and [[perjury]] claims, which are going to be common in the actual operation of [[Consumerium Services]] (see [[Chief Editor]] especially)
    *Expanding [[TIPAESA]] form to better model [[adversarial process]]es such as [[libel chill]] and [[perjury]] claims, which are going to be common in the actual operation of [[Consumerium Services]] (see [[Chief Editor]] especially)
    Retrieved from "https://develop.consumerium.org/wiki/Talk:Guidelines_for_claiming_corruption_cases_in_Research_Wiki"