Why haven't Wikipediocracy banned Larry Sanger?

For serious discussion of the "major" forum for Wikipedia criticism and how it fails.
Post Reply
User avatar
ChaosMeRee
Sucker
Posts: 225
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2023 11:59 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 155 times

Why haven't Wikipediocracy banned Larry Sanger?

Post by ChaosMeRee » Wed Nov 29, 2023 2:36 am

Seeing Wikipediocracy engaging in their latest round of We Hate Larry Sanger Ra! Ra! Ra!, and desperately hoping everyone forgets this never used to be the case (Larry was a co-founder of that forum and a valued contributor for many years), I am wondering, if they hate Larry so much, why haven't they banned him?
lsanger
Critic
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:36 pm
Wikipedia User: Larry Sanger
See, he's still listed as "critic". Whereas all the unwanted people are listed as "banned". Because they're banned.

I mean, I don't want to tell Jake his business, I know it upsets him and he has to go hide in his cabin in the woods with a bottle of scotch to recover, but it if were me and I was running a Wikipedia criticism site that spends an awful lot of time these days decrying Larry Sanger as a racist loon, I would have banned them.

Just to send the message, we don't like racists.

I think I know the reason why they won't ban Larry. Because it would attract too much attention and make people unearth all the embarrassing evidence that shows Wikipedocracy not only never used to hate Larry, they absolutely loved him.

It was actually news to me Larry was even a contributor there. I only found out when researching this topic, which I only did because when Giraffe Stapler is posting about something, you just know there is an untold story there. The Giraffe has this uncanny knack of shooting himself and anyone around him in the foot. A Wikipedian with a cause is a very stupid thing.

I always assumed Wikipediocracy's fondness for Larry was a little more pathetic, more in keeping with the kind of people who would want to be friends with a person like Beeblebrox and bans legitimate critics for lame reasons (like making them feel sad). That it was merely a case of Larry being hated by Jimmy Wales because he insisted on history remembering him as co-founder of Wikipedia, and so being loved and promoted by Wikipediocracy. The enemy of my enemey, and all that. Me pointing this out to them is an example of stuff that makes them sad. But hey, I can only present the facts.

I swear to God, for years and years, all those fuckers ever talked about, was how Jimmy Wales was not the sole founder of Wikipedia. Like anyone gave a shit. It is ironic that it is only now, when it would be quite embarrassing for Wikipedia to have the world learn it was co-founded by a racist loon, that they have shut up about it.

Their abuse of Larry is simply personal now, with no evident Wikipedia angle at all. And clearly that is because they don't want people looking too hard into what else Larry was doing in those early years (being a part of their gang). They feel betrayed.

Speaking of which, Wkipediocracy's ongoing condemnation of their former friend must baffle and confuse people who have heard of Wikipedia but know little about it, people who used to be their target market. Because the only thing Larry Sanger is known for these days is being the co-founder of Wikipedia but who later disavowed it because it is a biased pile of shite, a classic case of the lunatics taking over the asylum.

I think they don't want to draw outside attention to Larry because so many of the posters on Wikipediocracy are identifiable as said lunatics.

It must be so weird being a Wikipediocrat. All those split loyalties and and confused messaging.

One day they are at war with Oceana. The next it is Ukraine.

Should have stayed true to the path. Like I told you to. Less of the Jimbo obsession. More of the Wikipedia criticism.

Because now you look like fools.

Larry got out of it just in time. He was long gone from Wikipediocracy by 2019, which was iirc right about the time it was becoming extremely clear Wikipediocracy didn't so much want to destroy Wikipedia as marry it, thoroughly infiltrated as it was by said lunatics.

Their coverage of Beebelbrox's suspension is indistinguishable from being a Beeblebrox fanclub.

Larry would have never approved.

But as you know, they hate Larry, and they have always hated Larry, so who cares right?

The official narrative is alive and well in the Ministry.....
"Hemiauchenia" wrote:Sanger is just an all-round loon and grifter, and we've known that for years
That's a guy who only joined the forum in 2021, claiming to not only speak for it, but have knowledge of events that predate his arrival by a good two years or more.

Although I guess he could mean Wikipedia when he said "we". And wouldnt that be a hilarious Freudian slip!

Post Reply