33
edits
Talk:Wikipedia (from 142 perspective): Difference between revisions
link troll mafia: we need a good article on these passive-aggressive tactics, and their relation to "soft security"
(lawsuits are not a good way to handle GFDL problems) |
(link troll mafia: we need a good article on these passive-aggressive tactics, and their relation to "soft security") |
||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
[[English Wikipedia User Plautus satire]] [http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:JustNews comments] on Wikipedia: | [[English Wikipedia User Plautus satire]] [http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:JustNews comments] on Wikipedia: | ||
:"I can speak from personal experience with Wales and wikipedia, they are not nearly as interested in accuracy as they are in getting a polished product to package and sell to the highest (Disney) bidder. Blocking of users is frequent and capricious. The admins there run in packs, any time one of them finds something they want drowned off the pages, they alert the other admins who all stand in line to revert it one after another until they goad people into getting nasty with them. Classic troll mafia techniques, that project is shit as far as I'm concerned." | :"I can speak from personal experience with Wales and wikipedia, they are not nearly as interested in accuracy as they are in getting a polished product to package and sell to the highest (Disney) bidder. Blocking of users is frequent and capricious. The admins there run in packs, any time one of them finds something they want drowned off the pages, they alert the other admins who all stand in line to revert it one after another until they goad people into getting nasty with them. Classic [[troll mafia]] techniques, that project is shit as far as I'm concerned." | ||
::The correct move is to discredit [[Wikimedia]] with the governments and corporate bidders that have expressed interest or support, and to create other [[GFDL corpus access provider]]s that are free of this [[Wikimedia corruption]]. | ::The correct move is to discredit [[Wikimedia]] with the governments and corporate bidders that have expressed interest or support, and to create other [[GFDL corpus access provider]]s that are free of this [[Wikimedia corruption]]. | ||