Worst practices: Difference between revisions
stopping worst practices is more teleological than ontological |
as->because, because worst practices are defined into existence (and yes that is ontological, but we need not say so over and over again) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Worst practices''', the opposite of [[best practices]], are | '''Worst practices''', the opposite of [[best practices]], are [[factionally defined]] because different groups think different things are "worst": | ||
*[[Greens]] probably think [[deforestation]] and other [[extinction]] are worst | *[[Greens]] probably think [[deforestation]] and other [[extinction]] are worst | ||
Revision as of 18:16, 25 July 2004
Worst practices, the opposite of best practices, are factionally defined because different groups think different things are "worst":
- Greens probably think deforestation and other extinction are worst
- Pinks probably think child slavery and spreading disease are worst
- Reds probably think excessive profit and prison labour are worst
- Trolls probably think Wikimedia corruption and sysop vandalism are worst
Regardless of these teleological priorities, rack up enough "worst" across many factions, and you can expect a red light to flash as the Consumerium buying signal!