Propaganda: Difference between revisions
(by all means write articles on alleged troll corruption and some trolls are not ethical and even trollsturbation but don't pretend that they replace the issues with Wikimedia you hide) |
m (or vigilantism) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Propaganda''' is not what we do here, although [[trollism]] to some degree is propaganda against [[sysop vandalism]], it's a response to mindless assertions like that [[usurper]]s can somehow be trusted as '''steward'''s. | '''Propaganda''' is not what we do here, although [[trollism]] to some degree is propaganda against [[sysop vandalism]] or vigilantism, it's a response to mindless assertions like that [[usurper]]s can somehow be trusted as '''steward'''s. | ||
[[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.). | [[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.). | ||
Latest revision as of 08:14, 26 September 2004
Propaganda is not what we do here, although trollism to some degree is propaganda against sysop vandalism or vigilantism, it's a response to mindless assertions like that usurpers can somehow be trusted as stewards.
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. In general its only real response is to encourage vandalism of pages like this.
w:Nazi Germany and w:Soviet Russia believed the same things of itself, and many ordinary good people went along with the power structure. This is not necessarily evidence of evil in people, but, perhaps, willingness to go along with evil out of fear. For these reasons:
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: learn to take all criticism in stride, and all bias likewise.
If we can't handle what User:Trolls dishes out, then, how could we ever handle the funded trolls paid to do this on a daily basis to Research Wiki? We need clear definitions of what constitutes vandalism as well.