Propaganda: Difference between revisions
dealing with claim that usurpers are actually "stewards" (obvious propaganda, as what they do provably degrades the GFDL corpus in many cases)
No edit summary |
(dealing with claim that usurpers are actually "stewards" (obvious propaganda, as what they do provably degrades the GFDL corpus in many cases)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Propaganda''' is not what we do here, although [[trollism]] to some degree is propaganda against [[sysop vandalism]] | '''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. | ||
[[ | [[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. | |||
A better example of '''propaganda''' is the lies spread about [[Consumerium:We|us]] by the [[ | [[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 [[Consumerium:We|us]] by the [[usurper]]s of other [[large public wiki]]s. 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 [[GodKing]]s 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 troll]]s paid to do this on a daily basis to [[Research Wiki]]? We need clear definitions of what constitutes [[vandalism]] as well.'' | ''If we can't handle what [[User:Trolls]] dishes out, then, how could we ever handle the [[funded troll]]s paid to do this on a daily basis to [[Research Wiki]]? We need clear definitions of what constitutes [[vandalism]] as well.'' | ||