False and unsubstantiated claims: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

False and unsubstantiated claims (edit)

Revision as of 09:52, 10 September 2004

410 bytes removed , 10 September 2004

moving last para to talk-page

Jukeboksi

Bureaucrats, developer, Administrators

9,842

edits

Revision as of 17:31, 9 September 2004 (edit) 142.177.109.161 (talk) No edit summary ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 09:52, 10 September 2004 (edit) (undo) Jukeboksi (talk \| contribs) (moving last para to talk-page)
Line 15:		Line 15:

	It is also common to label fully substantiated and easily documented '''claims''' as "'''false'''" or "'''unsubstantiated'''" as a means of intimidating those who make them. This tactic is seen for instance on both sides of [[troll-sysop struggle]] and has marked the [[GFDL corpus]] debate to a remarkable degree: reducing the entire project to [[tabloid journalism]] at best, [[libel pit]] at worst, and rendering [[Wikipedia]] useless as reference for journalistic purposes.		It is also common to label fully substantiated and easily documented '''claims''' as "'''false'''" or "'''unsubstantiated'''" as a means of intimidating those who make them. This tactic is seen for instance on both sides of [[troll-sysop struggle]] and has marked the [[GFDL corpus]] debate to a remarkable degree: reducing the entire project to [[tabloid journalism]] at best, [[libel pit]] at worst, and rendering [[Wikipedia]] useless as reference for journalistic purposes.

	[[Consumerium Services]] have been pressured to label [[Wikimedia corruption]] charges as '''false and unsubstantiated'''. Most or all of which of these claims were fully substantiated and documented at one time, but subject to continous [[vandalism]] by a [[clique]] determed to obscure that very fact. Over time, the influence of such cliques can be toxic and prevent any serious debate about policies.