Everipeidia blockchain migration

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu Sep 06, 2018 8:31 am

CrowsNest wrote:If they had the first idea of the real benefits of putting their scribblings on the blockhain, which go far beyond currency, they'd have done it already.

You would think Eric of all people would be interested in hearing more about a Wikipedia alternative where there is no pesky WMF, no oppressive Admin class, identifiable authors who get to have their work compete with and ranked higher than other people's based on its evident quality, etc, etc.

Exacte. The system can't fossilise because of the leak of that upper class who's only interest is to expand there own bureaucracy. Lousy editors are emitted, and in that way the project gets attractive for real content writers. So, the content can grow and improve, what will be the backbone under the crypto money. And you are liberated from all the WMF activism.

User avatar
Paul Bedson
Sucks
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:48 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by Paul Bedson » Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:53 am

AndrewForson wrote:In particular, while by no means an expert in the area myself, I think it likely that Paul Bedson would agree that his views on the archaeology of the Levant are not those currently supported by the academic mainstream.


No, I wouldn't agree. My views on the Neolithic archaeology of the Levant are perfectly in line with the most up to date Levantine Primacy Hypothesis whereas Wikpedia's old information generally tends towards Braidwood's outdated Hilly Flanks one. I even met Gordon Hillman, who worked on Levantine Primacy thesis a few times and went on archaeology walks with him in Sussex.

You'll have to look up Levantine Primacy on Everipedia because Wikipedia doesn't have the page or the theory. This is actually because I seem to be the most expert Wikipedian that I have come across in Levantine archaeology since I joined Wikipedia about 10 years ago. My suggestion to investigate Beqaa valley neolithic sites better to support and develop Levantine Primacy hypothesis are just that, calls for untested sites to get more research and protection, specifically the one near Rachaya which seems to fit the geography of several ancient myths and stories. I'm not making any claims apart from expounding on the physical evidence I have seen in calls for further excavations.

I like to think that's one reason to read Everipedia because my coverage of the archaeology of the Levant is better than Wikipedias and more in depth. We do need more subject specalists like me, and perhaps a newdesk covering mainstream and crypto news from our own, decentralized, neutral perspective. That would also bring value to the readers. You made a good point there that I think about a lot lately, so I don't mind your criticism and no need for Crowsnest to apologize too much. This is a fascinating discussion and I hope you'll agree now, not a waste of threadspace?
Wikipedia Sucks! Justipedia doesn't and it's nice, comfortable and friendly there! https://justapedia.org/wiki/User:Paul_Bedson
Image

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by CrowsNest » Thu Sep 06, 2018 10:47 am

AndrewForson wrote:
AndyTheGrump wrote:No explanation as to why anyone should want to read it, I note. Seems to be a recurring pattern when Ponzipedia is concerned.

A quick look at the content reveals no particular reason why anyone would want to read it. Indeed, there's no clear explanation of what it is supposed to be. An omnium gatherum of articles about stuff is not an encyclopaedia, or a directory, or indeed anything useful -- it's just a heap of stuff. A clear policy for what sort of information is supposed to be included, and what the rader shouls expect to find, or, just as importantly, not find, is really a prerequisite. The "if you build it they will come" strategy doesn't really produce encyclopaedias, as the history of Wikipedia has proved.

Sure, you can welcome articles about individual people (all 7 billion of them?), or businesses, or superphysic numeration, metathasm and corolopsis: but unless you have a way of getting some kind of coverage, with a plan, and some goals, so that the readers knows that they are there, or likely to be there, or should be there, what's the point?
Really? This is how low you're willing to stoop? Thanks site exists so serious critics can be divorced from the moronic ramblings of illiterate idiots like ATG. So you choose to become his clone? Sad.

Dysklyver should not have to a read to such ignorant reviews of his work.

And Everipedia deserves to be criticised by people who take the five seconds required to find their FAQ, which you clearly didn't do when you wrote this utter garbage.

You're a fucking idiot. It is embarassing.

User avatar
Paul Bedson
Sucks
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:48 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by Paul Bedson » Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:31 am

So as not to start a new thread, I thought to mention that today, Everipedia won the Block Award 2018 for World Impact.

Image
Wikipedia Sucks! Justipedia doesn't and it's nice, comfortable and friendly there! https://justapedia.org/wiki/User:Paul_Bedson
Image

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu Sep 06, 2018 12:48 pm

CrowsNest wrote:
AndrewForson wrote:
AndyTheGrump wrote:No explanation as to why anyone should want to read it, I note. Seems to be a recurring pattern when Ponzipedia is concerned.

A quick look at the content reveals no particular reason why anyone would want to read it. Indeed, there's no clear explanation of what it is supposed to be. An omnium gatherum of articles about stuff is not an encyclopaedia, or a directory, or indeed anything useful -- it's just a heap of stuff. A clear policy for what sort of information is supposed to be included, and what the rader shouls expect to find, or, just as importantly, not find, is really a prerequisite. The "if you build it they will come" strategy doesn't really produce encyclopaedias, as the history of Wikipedia has proved.

Sure, you can welcome articles about individual people (all 7 billion of them?), or businesses, or superphysic numeration, metathasm and corolopsis: but unless you have a way of getting some kind of coverage, with a plan, and some goals, so that the readers knows that they are there, or likely to be there, or should be there, what's the point?
Really? This is how low you're willing to stoop? Thanks site exists so serious critics can be divorced from the moronic ramblings of illiterate idiots like ATG. So you choose to become his clone? Sad.

Dysklyver should not have to a read to such ignorant reviews of his work.

And Everipedia deserves to be criticised by people who take the five seconds required to find their FAQ, which you clearly didn't do when you wrote this utter garbage.

You're a fucking idiot. It is embarassing.

Ach, what did they ever read. Do you really think the ever read for instance the Terms of Use of Wikipedia? They simple never did any rechearch on Wikipedia, WMF, Everipedia, money streams like I did in the eurocrisis and I hope Artur will not spend to much of his time on this idiots too, Crow. They are just so incredible stupide.

User avatar
AndrewForson
Sucks Critic
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 7:56 am

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by AndrewForson » Thu Sep 06, 2018 5:36 pm

CrowsNest wrote:
AndrewForson wrote:[...]
Really? This is how low you're willing to stoop? Thanks site exists so serious critics can be divorced from the moronic ramblings of illiterate idiots like ATG. So you choose to become his clone? Sad.

Dysklyver should not have to a read to such ignorant reviews of his work.

And Everipedia deserves to be criticised by people who take the five seconds required to find their FAQ, which you clearly didn't do when you wrote this utter garbage.

You're a fucking idiot. It is embarassing.

I'm not embarassed. But then I'm not the one who's red in the face, incoherently shouting vulgar abuse trough foam-flecked lips, spraying unwary bystanders with spittle.

Perhaps you had noticed that this is a forum, where various people discuss various topics. Treating every discussion as a fight between you and some other member of the forum, a zero-sum game which you must at all costs win every time you play, is not an effective way of participating. Shouting at a statement does not refute it: hurling vulgar abuse at your chosen enemy does not make your case, nor does it convey any useful information to the other members. Those others may in time come to wonder why you disdain to provide any useful information or argument for the forum while pursing your personal squabbles: indeed whether your continuing participation has any value for the forum as a whole. One amusing sidelight, though, is that you seem to regard "Wikipedian" as the worst insult you can bring to bear.

Grade: C. Vulgar abuse is not a substitute for argument or information. Needs to work on developing respect for the forum as a whole.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:17 pm

Be fair Andrew. Not every forum is the same and that is good thing. And this is a unplugged forum, and everybody who is posting here has to be aware of that. Yes, there is a forum where where users ar protected, but that is not here. You can't make here your own forum rules, just like we can't on WO. If I post on WO I am very, very careful, I tolerate for instance Ming and some others. I tolerate it even if Jake is deleting a in my opinion a complete normal posting like what happend last time with GW.
I can't say how the gender lady must moderate here blog, it is not my business how Jake moderates his forum with Kings and it is not up to me how Aggie moderates his forum.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by CrowsNest » Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:34 pm

AndrewForson wrote:
CrowsNest wrote:
AndrewForson wrote:[...]
Really? This is how low you're willing to stoop? Thanks site exists so serious critics can be divorced from the moronic ramblings of illiterate idiots like ATG. So you choose to become his clone? Sad.

Dysklyver should not have to a read to such ignorant reviews of his work.

And Everipedia deserves to be criticised by people who take the five seconds required to find their FAQ, which you clearly didn't do when you wrote this utter garbage.

You're a fucking idiot. It is embarassing.

I'm not embarassed. But then I'm not the one who's red in the face, incoherently shouting vulgar abuse trough foam-flecked lips, spraying unwary bystanders with spittle.

Perhaps you had noticed that this is a forum, where various people discuss various topics. Treating every discussion as a fight between you and some other member of the forum, a zero-sum game which you must at all costs win every time you play, is not an effective way of participating. Shouting at a statement does not refute it: hurling vulgar abuse at your chosen enemy does not make your case, nor does it convey any useful information to the other members. Those others may in time come to wonder why you disdain to provide any useful information or argument for the forum while pursing your personal squabbles: indeed whether your continuing participation has any value for the forum as a whole. One amusing sidelight, though, is that you seem to regard "Wikipedian" as the worst insult you can bring to bear.

Grade: C. Vulgar abuse is not a substitute for argument or information. Needs to work on developing respect for the forum as a whole.
You're obsessed with casting me as angry. Almost as if you aim for it. What's that about? You don't make me angry. The abuse above was delivered with a steady hand and a steely eye. I set out with the clear intent to offend you. Sometimes people say stuff which is so dumb, and it cannot have been a mistake, it deserves only abuse. Other people might take a step back and wonder what it was they said that deserved such abuse. You, not so much.

This is a forum, it is indeed a place for discussion. So why are you abusing it to post the sort of crap you did above? Do you think people here are stupid? Do you think people would be remotely interested in debating why it is you felt it appropriate to post that utter crap? People can read, people can read Dysklyver's blog, they can read the Everipedia FAQ, they can see what you wrote is utter garbage.

They probably know why you're writing utter garbage about Everioedia, you've been nice enough to tell us. So they probably already know you're not a straight dealer, someone whose claims can be taken as read. I'm not here to read utter garbage, nor am I need to stand by and let others post it. There's another critic forum where that's considered useful. They love people who will say any old shit about something they have a declared dislike of.

Anyone here who thinks I have no respect for this forum, or that I do not convey useful information, can make themselves known. I'm sure they can speak for themselves, if only to makes sure you are not seen as speaking for them. Nobody would be happy at someone so ignorant as you, speaking for them.

User avatar
AndrewForson
Sucks Critic
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 7:56 am

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by AndrewForson » Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:38 pm

Graaf Statler wrote:Be fair Andrew. Not every forum is the same and that is good thing. And this is a unplugged forum, and everybody who is posting here has to be aware of that. Yes, there is a forum where where users ar protected, but that is not here. You can't make here your own forum rules, just like we can't on WO. If I post on WO I am very, very careful, I tolerate for instance Ming and some others. I tolerate it even if Jake is deleting a in my opinion a complete normal posting like what happend last time with GW.
I can't say how the gender lady must moderate here blog, it is not my business how Jake moderates his forum with Kings and it is not up to me how Aggie moderates his forum.

Graaf, I'm pointing out that some postings, such as vulgar abuse, are less useful than others. I'm not making rules about it -- the only rule in operation here is the law of cause-and-effect. I'm not asking to be protected from vulgar abuse -- I'm suggesting that the forum at large may come to find it an impediment to their use of the forum.

It seems that CN disagrees with my analysis of Everipedia's plans, or lack thereof, developing and sustaining a clear, coherent and complete coverage of some chosen set of topics. I don't think they have any workable plans, and I assume that CN does, although his rant failed to convey any sense of what those plans were or why he thought they would work. Perhaps, as an enthusiastic writer there, you are better able to explain your thinking on the subject? CN thinks it intolerable that I should agree with -- horror or horrors -- a Wikipedian on the topic of what the intended and likely readership of Everipedia is, but doesn't share his views on what that readership might be. Perhaps again you have a view on who your intended readers are, and whether and why you are confident that they will in fact be reading your articles?

User avatar
AndrewForson
Sucks Critic
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 7:56 am

Re: Everipeidia blockchain migration

Post by AndrewForson » Thu Sep 06, 2018 6:45 pm

CrowsNest wrote:You're obsessed with casting me as angry. Almost as if you aim for it. What's that about? You don't make me angry. The abuse above was delivered with a steady hand and a steely eye. I set out with the clear intent to offend you. Sometimes people say stuff which is so dumb, and it cannot have been a mistake, it deserves only abuse. Other people might take a step back and wonder what it was they said that deserved such abuse. You, not so much.

This is a forum, it is indeed a place for discussion. So why are you abusing it to post the sort of crap you did above? Do you think people here are stupid? Do you think people would be remotely interested in debating why it is you felt it appropriate to post that utter crap? People can read, people can read Dysklyver's blog, they can read the Everipedia FAQ, they can see what you wrote is utter garbage.

They probably know why you're writing utter garbage about Everioedia, you've been nice enough to tell us. So they probably already know you're not a straight dealer, someone whose claims can be taken as read. I'm not here to read utter garbage, nor am I need to stand by and let others post it. There's another critic forum where that's considered useful. They love people who will say any old shit about something they have a declared dislike of.

Anyone here who thinks I have no respect for this forum, or that I do not convey useful information, can make themselves known. I'm sure they can speak for themselves, if only to makes sure you are not seen as speaking for them. Nobody would be happy at someone so ignorant as you, speaking for them.


Ah, so it was deliberate bullying disguised as an intemperate rant. I'll raise your grade to C+ for that little deception.

As for the rest, you seem to think that, when you disagree with someone's assessment, it is necessarily intellectually dishonest. This renders you incapable of dealing with actual arguments, and so less useful than you could be to the forum.

Post Reply