Talk:142.177.X.X: Difference between revisions
answer "blues"
No edit summary |
(answer "blues") |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
::[[Blues]] you didn't explain. | ::[[Blues]] you didn't explain. | ||
:::Blues are [[globalization]] believers, those who read ''[[The Economist]]'' and believe it, or at least pretend to. Blue for sea, sky, the UN, and liquidity. | |||
---- | ---- | ||
[[Faction]]: 13 links (position nro. 1 on the wanted pages). I think that I understand the consept of faction, but originally in my mind factions were something that would emerge in a self-organizing manner, | [[Faction]]: 13 links (position nro. 1 on the wanted pages). I think that I understand the consept of faction, but originally in my mind factions were something that would emerge in a self-organizing manner, | ||
| Line 69: | Line 72: | ||
And why, why oh why did you have to troll the [[Opinion Wiki]] just now when i have really pressing non-consumerium issues i have to attend to? [[Talk:Opinion Wiki]] was good stuff, thanks for it. | And why, why oh why did you have to troll the [[Opinion Wiki]] just now when i have really pressing non-consumerium issues i have to attend to? [[Talk:Opinion Wiki]] was good stuff, thanks for it. | ||
:Because we have a good chance right now to work out the way we look at troll-type comments and other 'distributed identities'. Over at [http://www.metaweb.com www.Metaweb.com] there is now active discussion of [http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Metaweb: | :Because we have a good chance right now to work out the way we look at troll-type comments and other 'distributed identities'. Over at [http://www.metaweb.com www.Metaweb.com] there is now active discussion of [http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Metaweb:some_body "some body"] versus [http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Metaweb:no body "no_body"] status, and questions about [http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Metaweb:glossary glossary] and how [http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Metaweb:faction faction]s might compete to define very basic terms, and allocate credibility to articles there. If the discussion happens over at Consumerium at the same time, well, it will very much more likely result in compatible ways. | ||