Re: Wikipedia's political bias problem
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:33 am
Oh, and note now BullRangifer has outlined why it would be OK for JzG to block people on the basis of this essay (it is currently widely believed even by those who support it, that by committing it to paper, JzG has disqualified himself from ever being able to block anyone in the US politics topic area).
BullRangifer believes JzG can (and should) use his Admin powers in this fashion, because he would not be blocking them for their political opinions, but because they are being disruptive. Because, and he sees this as a FACT, having the wrong political opinion guarantees you will disrupt Wikipedia. He said it, plain as day ("it's a fact that it affects their editing").
The whole point of this horrible essay, as he says, is to enshrine the sheer arrogance it takes to declare everyone who doesn't accept the truthiness of it, as an ENEMY OF WIKIPEDIA. Naturally, he doesn't see the irony at all. Not even a little bit. Because he's a deranged little fuck, for whom "fact" has become indivisible from the (right) "opinion".
Let me give you a practical example. Say an editor puts in their user page that they believe the southern border wall is a good idea. They don't say why, they merely state it is their opinion. But they do make edits to related articles. Under this essay, that editor needs to be blocked, and can be blocked by JzG, without any examination of their edits at all. The mere fact that they are editing, is a problem, according to this essay, or at least BullRangifer's interpretation of it, which is most assuredly how JzG intends it to be interpreted in the fullness of time.
If this fucked up shit isn't a matter for ArbCom, if the community does not want them to step in and apply corrective action in the form of stern reminders of what policy says and why, then frankly ArbCom has no role at all. And if you know anything about JzG and the Untouchables like him who have always been at the core of Wikipedia, you know he has always been of the opinion that ArbCom should not exist, or at least it should not exist to curtail his powers. As he has repeatedly said, where is the questionable Administrative conduct in what he has done?
Wikipedia is biased as fuck. At the core, institutional level.
Anyone who disagrees with this essay who is still editing Wikipedia in the belief it is a neutral reference work, is a fool. Because they are coming for you. You will be given the special mark, you will be herded into the special transport, your influence on their world will be erased. Systematically, all above board according to the new policies this essay laid the groundwork for, policies that the Founders of Wikipedia could never have even imagined (seriously, do you see Jimmy Wales supporting this garbage? he knows how fucked up it is, how potentially inflammatory it is). Again, they do not see the irony. Much like hard-core Trump supporters do not see the irony in much of what they say or do.
Don't say I didn't warn you, you stupid fucks.
Oh, and hey, good folks of Wikipediocracy, how about you do your job and EXPOSE some of this shit? If you really want people to believe you're not just a Wikipedia clone, happy to host only Wikipedian views of what is logical and defensible. It won't matter how hard you suck his dick, JzG is never going to bestow legitimacy on your shitty website. The mere act of posting on there will be added to the list of what makes a person incompetent to edit, soon enough. And I so want to see the look on the face of Tim "I stood up to the evil Jimmy Wales, aren't I brave?" Davenport when it happens.
Useless fucking pseudo-critics. Into the sea with you.
BullRangifer believes JzG can (and should) use his Admin powers in this fashion, because he would not be blocking them for their political opinions, but because they are being disruptive. Because, and he sees this as a FACT, having the wrong political opinion guarantees you will disrupt Wikipedia. He said it, plain as day ("it's a fact that it affects their editing").
The whole point of this horrible essay, as he says, is to enshrine the sheer arrogance it takes to declare everyone who doesn't accept the truthiness of it, as an ENEMY OF WIKIPEDIA. Naturally, he doesn't see the irony at all. Not even a little bit. Because he's a deranged little fuck, for whom "fact" has become indivisible from the (right) "opinion".
Let me give you a practical example. Say an editor puts in their user page that they believe the southern border wall is a good idea. They don't say why, they merely state it is their opinion. But they do make edits to related articles. Under this essay, that editor needs to be blocked, and can be blocked by JzG, without any examination of their edits at all. The mere fact that they are editing, is a problem, according to this essay, or at least BullRangifer's interpretation of it, which is most assuredly how JzG intends it to be interpreted in the fullness of time.
If this fucked up shit isn't a matter for ArbCom, if the community does not want them to step in and apply corrective action in the form of stern reminders of what policy says and why, then frankly ArbCom has no role at all. And if you know anything about JzG and the Untouchables like him who have always been at the core of Wikipedia, you know he has always been of the opinion that ArbCom should not exist, or at least it should not exist to curtail his powers. As he has repeatedly said, where is the questionable Administrative conduct in what he has done?
Wikipedia is biased as fuck. At the core, institutional level.
Anyone who disagrees with this essay who is still editing Wikipedia in the belief it is a neutral reference work, is a fool. Because they are coming for you. You will be given the special mark, you will be herded into the special transport, your influence on their world will be erased. Systematically, all above board according to the new policies this essay laid the groundwork for, policies that the Founders of Wikipedia could never have even imagined (seriously, do you see Jimmy Wales supporting this garbage? he knows how fucked up it is, how potentially inflammatory it is). Again, they do not see the irony. Much like hard-core Trump supporters do not see the irony in much of what they say or do.
Don't say I didn't warn you, you stupid fucks.
Oh, and hey, good folks of Wikipediocracy, how about you do your job and EXPOSE some of this shit? If you really want people to believe you're not just a Wikipedia clone, happy to host only Wikipedian views of what is logical and defensible. It won't matter how hard you suck his dick, JzG is never going to bestow legitimacy on your shitty website. The mere act of posting on there will be added to the list of what makes a person incompetent to edit, soon enough. And I so want to see the look on the face of Tim "I stood up to the evil Jimmy Wales, aren't I brave?" Davenport when it happens.
Useless fucking pseudo-critics. Into the sea with you.