Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Because no one else is doing it--not even the media.
User avatar
CMAwatch
Sucks Critic
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:26 pm
Location: Community Moderation Abuse Watch
Has thanked: 109 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Sanger's law, a.k.a. why criticism is banned.

Post by CMAwatch » Fri Oct 02, 2020 3:00 pm

Side note: Thankfully, this forum was only down for minutes. I thought it would be a longer outage.

From here:
Sanger's Law states that online communities' cultures generally are established quickly and then become very resistant to change, because they are self-selecting. Those users who are attracted to the existing culture join (and may even be given sysop powers) and help reinforce that culture. Those users who are repelled by the culture leave (or are banned) and no longer directly influence the site. This is especially true on sites such as Wikipedia […].
I.e. who joins earlier makes the rules.

Sounds pretty CABAListic, doesn't it?

This explains a lot of Wikipedia's problems, such as deletionism.
#BbbGate
Weaponizing WP:G5
Oops! Didn't think we'd see? It's right there on WikipediaSucks.co!
ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:22 am
[Wikipedia is] a stupid video game, and the "encyclopedia" is an accidental byproduct.


User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Been thanked: 113 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Tue Jul 13, 2021 8:03 pm

But Larry believes in QAnon, so fuck him

-Wikipediocracy, 2021.

Midsize Jake is a sellout mother fucker.

Under his management, Wikipediocracy is ALL IN on the idea that the good folks of Wikipedia are neutral, and they come at things like the Daily Mail ban with honesty and integrity.

Balls fucking deep.

Sucking Wikipedia dick hard, from Beeblebrox to NewYorkBrad. Ensuring that not one single die hard Wikipedia mother fucker, has to account for anything they do, if doing so would expose the truth.

Scum.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by ericbarbour » Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:52 am

For what it's worth, this is the work of "Snooganssnoogans". Better known as Cirt. You remember him, Daniel.....also I would not be surprised if CowHouse turns out to also be Cirt. He always maintains a large sock drawer.

And as usual, idiot admins like Bbb23, Materialscientist and Neutrality are protecting him. Ask me about Neutrality sometime.

Now you know what Cirt's been doing the last couple of years. I'm guessing he backed off on Scientology, Werner Erhard, and TM, is trying to avoid fighting over Israel/Palestine issues and sniping at American conservative politicians (although he continues to do both on occasion), and now he wants to openly destroy any journalist who "might be supporting the Assad regime" or something.

With Cirt it is always personal, political, petty and crude. And always involves Israel criticism or Wikipedia's institutional hatred of Hubbard's Nut Squad--even if only in the background. His defenders usually have a history of supporting him in his disputes, going back to early Scientology battles pre-2007. For two years the dumbass tried to stroke egos in an attempt to get his Sagecandor account adminship--but could not stop fighting with people and making a fool of himself. Two words: Minassian Media. Bbb23, one of his reliable supporters, ended up blocking Sagecandor in 2018. So Cirt went over to another sock account and started grinding it. Been doing so for five years semi-successfully.

He is a fucking lunatic. Still. And if they continue to tolerate him, they only make themselves look worse.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by ericbarbour » Wed Jul 14, 2021 8:34 am

Don't believe me? Ask some of the people on Wikipediocracy:

https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... =8&t=10591
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 96#p260396
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 46#p242246

Comment by "Katnips" on Wikipediocracy, July 2019:
The problem with Snoog isn't a left vs. right thing. It's a partisan thing, D vs. R. He's aggressively defensive of the modern (establishment) version of the U.S. Democratic Party. For instance, he thinks he's making himself look ecumenical by being an attack dog on Tulsi Gabbard's page, but yeah....no one who's anyone in the Democratic Party gives two licks about her (she's at Marianne Williamson's level, basically) so it's an easy way for him to score points and say "hey, I put negative content on Democratic pages, too!" Yeah, ones that don't matter. And for some reason the deeply grandfathered-in admin Neutrality goes around cleaning up Snoog's messes for him and no one seems to notice/care. On many political issues I certainly agree with Snoog, but I've come to deeply resent what a bully he is. His strategy is basically to be an insufferable asshole and to continualy raise the costs of anyone who disagrees with him. Most (sane) people give up, leaving him to effectively take ownership over whatever articles he likes. Whatever one's politics, this isn't a healthy dynamic for Wikipedia. And it has made me quite suspicious that he's being paid, because what kind of volunteer would be so extremely dogged in such an icky, toxic environment. I stopped editing years ago but still have to hate watch my favorite show, ha.

User avatar
sashi
Sucks Critic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:01 am
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by sashi » Sat Jul 17, 2021 3:39 pm

ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:52 am
Ask me about Neutrality sometime.
Consider yourself asked. It's strange how Larry avoids talking both about Neutrality & about Minassian. I guess that sort of in-the-weeds stuff isn't going to get you as much Twitter-love as some of the other craziness he gets involved in.

As for Snoog being Cirt, I dunno. Some have suggested it's Tarc, who has (I'm pretty sure) explicitly denied it.

Sagecandor left Snoog advice at one point on the latter's talkpage, so there's that, too. I suppose it could be second-degree performance art, but I've always worked under the assumption that the Snoog was not, himself (or herself, for that matter), the Cirt.

Your comments about CowHouse are interesting given the account's start-date. ( § )

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by ericbarbour » Sat Jul 17, 2021 10:43 pm

sashi wrote:
Sat Jul 17, 2021 3:39 pm
ericbarbour wrote:
Wed Jul 14, 2021 7:52 am
Ask me about Neutrality sometime.
Consider yourself asked.
from book wiki
Neutrality

Identity is a complete mystery. Many observers suspect he also operated the El_C administrative account, and may have other sockpuppets on WMF projects. There is further suspicion that MrX is another sock account.

Showed up May 2004, started editing the article about El Cid heavily. Also fascinated by the Abu Ghraib scandal and left-wing politician Dennis Kucinich, as well as John Kerry and Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action. Extremely robotic gnome. Ran for admin three times in 2004, first one was erased and difficult to find (archive, second one in August was a disaster, and led to a pathetic RFC over his username). Finally getting it in October. Note many complaints about abusive behaviour.

His early obsession with the Democratic Underground article indicates a possible connection to the organization. Said article also shows many possible sock accounts in its history, which is extremely messy. It has grown and shrunk, and been editwarred repeatedly, since 2004.

He was dragged into this strange arbitration in March 2005, which was settled by Wales and "hushed up".

Elected to Arbcom December 2005, where he/she/whatever served for two years with little attention drawn.

Probably notable only for writing the five pillars of Wikipedia one afternoon. Interestingly his original version did not contain the principle that 'anyone can edit'. This was added later by another even less notable editor. Despite this, the principle is often cited by a crowd of ruffians any time someone brings up the sensible idea of registered editing only.

Neutrality maintained his adminship and continued to edit in his favorite subject areas thereafter, with a continued preference for leftist politics. His activity slowed in 2012 and picked up again in 2015.
It would not surprise me if Neutrality, El C and MrX were all carefully-maintained sockpuppets belonging to Cirt. They certainly have similar obsessions. Far more deeply insane things have happened on Wikipedia in the past. Their blind support in editwars by longtime insiders should tell you something.

And just btw: last year MrX attempted to drag Guy Chapman off to Arbcom. And for his trouble, he was forced off Wikipedia. One simply DOES NOT criticize or attempt to punish Guy Chapman. Because Guy Chapman, like pony friendship, is MAGIC. Guy is surrounded by pink sparkles of Wiki-Power.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =977693218

User avatar
sashi
Sucks Critic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:01 am
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by sashi » Sun Jul 18, 2021 9:15 pm

And here I thought MrX just wandered off into a new account because he was miffed at being reverted for a non-admin close. (Or felt the heat was getting a little hot in the kitchen with the details about his tag-teaming surfacing...)

In loosely related matters, I remember finding it weird that Slatersteven was getting interested in the story of Edward Colston's "philanthropy" (it was his complaint against me at the 3RR board which set in motion my eventual banning for revealing El C's 27-hour editing sessions).

I'd always assumed SS filed his complaint because I disagreed with him about the Mail ban and on the "let's hammer Assange fifteen ways till Tuesday" policy (and frankly because I'd made life a bit difficult for the assorted Snoox).

This evening, I was surprised to learn that (en.wp banned) Tarc added this fine character reference :shock: for the upstanding little weasel :lol: to WPO an hour or so after it happened. Since Snoog has never messed with that article, this suggests that Tarc most likely was peering into Slatersteven's soul when logged in as a different user.

:twisted:

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Been thanked: 113 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Sun Jul 18, 2021 10:55 pm

Based on their Guy Maconesque statements about the Mail, it's rather obvious Slater Steven wouldn't feel particularly constrained by any Wikipedia policy if he felt it got in the way of his personal goals.

User avatar
Cla68
Sucks
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2020 7:18 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 90 times

Re: Larry Sanger harshly criticizes Wikipedia

Post by Cla68 » Fri Jul 23, 2021 3:56 pm

Larry Sanger was briefly interviewed by Tucker Carlson on Fox News last night:

https://www.foxnews.com/person/c/tucker-carlson

There is not a direct link to the video segment, you have to peruse the list of pop-up videos there and click on it.

I think Sanger's idea of having an "encyclopedia commons" is a good idea. It would really help to de-emphasize Wikipedia as a source of information/misinformation.

Post Reply