False and unsubstantiated claims: Difference between revisions

Line 1:

'''False and unsubstantiated claims''' appear often on the [[Wikipedia mailing list]] and other forums devoted to maintaining a [[clique]] in a position of power. [[Power grab]]s are enabled by the tolerance of such claims without any means or standards to examine them, e.g. putting them in [[TIPAESA]] form, and restricting or preventing anyone from deleting or modifying them until they are answered to.

Some [[large public wiki]]s have a single [[GodKing]] to declare what constitute '''false''' or ''unsubstantiated'''. This person is obviously in a [[conflict of interest]] regarding such claims made about his own utterances or claims. Accordingly, [[corruption]], e.g. [[Wikimedia corruption]], is the only possible result of failing to have a single pipeline to resolve claims or issues that does not involve the person or people who are actually talked about.

Some [[large public wiki]]s have a single [[GodKing]] to declare what constitute '''false''' or '''unsubstantiated'''. This person is obviously in a [[conflict of interest]] regarding such claims made about his own utterances or claims. Accordingly, [[corruption]], e.g. [[Wikimedia corruption]], is the only possible result of failing to have a [[Consumerium Process|single pipeline to resolve claims or issues]] that does not involve the person or people who are actually talked about.

Of all such claims, those regarding [[alleged or collective identity]] are the most common, and hardest to control, given the mutability of [[identity on the Internet]].

Of all such claims, those regarding [[alleged and collective identity]] are the most common, and hardest to control, given the mutability of [[identity on the Internet]].

The problem with tolerating unlimited '''claims''' is that it exposes one to: