Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.

Moderator: Abd

Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby Strelnikov » Sun Sep 02, 2018 12:03 am

https://wikipedia-sucks-badly.blogspot. ... media.html

I could have put up a rogues' gallery like I did with Metapedia, but all of them provide photos of themselves, all except for Tom Hogarth.

He may resemble this: Image
Still "Globally Banned" on Wikipedia for the high crime of journalism.
User avatar
Strelnikov
Psyop
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:25 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby Graaf Statler » Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:08 am

Lobby groups behind a high profile campaign on Wikipedia urging a switch to US-style copyright law in Australia have links to interests, including multinationals such as Google, which will gain substantially from any change to a so-called “fair use” system......The links are undeclared when Australian visitors to Wikipedia, which is run by registered charity Wikimedia Australia, are asked to email their local federal member of parliament......The Wikimedia Foundation told Business Insider: “Google is one of many donors that contributes to the Wikimedia Foundation, and their contributions have not influenced Wikipedia’s involvement in the fair use campaign in Australia.

I wouldn't call them lobby groups, I call them a bunch of idiots. Lobby groups are widely accepted, and there are even professional lobbyists, that is not he point. The point is democracy. The free source movement with it's US-style copyright law is only in Europe supported by the piratenparty, a party with one MEP in the European parlement and with hardly any voters. The other party's don't support fair use.
How are these "lobbyists' like Romaine, Gelach, Dimi, etc thinking to overrule the democratic chosen Eurlo parlement with a vision what is not supported by the European parliaments and the European population? Just by doing it and waiting till the man with the hammer comes by? Because that is the result at they end. Gekkenwerk we call this in Holland, the work of a fool. Because, even if the European parement should embrace there US-style copyright law , what will not happened of course, it is a complete pyrrhus victory. Because licences and copyright in Europa is a local matter of the different national parlement. There is no European copyright, and I doubt if there will ever be a European copyright seen the political situation as it is in Europe.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby Graaf Statler » Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:16 am

Lobby groups behind a high profile campaign on Wikipedia urging a switch to US-style copyright law in Australia have links to interests, including multinationals such as Google, which will gain substantially from any change to a so-called “fair use” system......The links are undeclared when Australian visitors to Wikipedia, which is run by registered charity Wikimedia Australia, are asked to email their local federal member of parliament......The Wikimedia Foundation told Business Insider: “Google is one of many donors that contributes to the Wikimedia Foundation, and their contributions have not influenced Wikipedia’s involvement in the fair use campaign in Australia.

I wouldn't call them lobby groups, I call them a bunch of idiots. Lobby groups are widely accepted, and there are even professional lobbyists, that is not he point. The point is democracy. The free source movement with it's US-style copyright law is only in Europe supported by the piratenparty, a party with one MEP in the European parlement and with hardly any voters. The other party's don't support fair use.
How are these "lobbyists' like Romaine, Gelach, Dimi, etc thinking to overrule the democratic chosen Eurlo parlement with a vision what is not supported by the European parliaments and the European population? Just by doing it and waiting till the man with the hammer comes by? Because that is the result at they end. Gekkenwerk we call this in Holland, the work of a fool. Because, even if the European parement should embrace there US-style copyright law , what will not happened of course, it is a complete pyrrhus victory. Because licences and copyright in Europa is a local matter of the different national parlement. There is no European copyright, and I doubt if there will ever be a European copyright seen the political situation as it is in Europe at the moment.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby AndrewForson » Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:19 am

Arguing that the whole Australian chapter has been somehow illegal since 2012 because of perceived irregularities in the reorganisation of the committee is about as sensible, and effective, as claiming to be the true king of England because of your descent from Ethelred the Unready, the Princes in the Tower, Lady Jane Grey, the Old Pretender, or somesuch.
User avatar
AndrewForson
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:56 pm

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby CrowsNest » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:27 am

How depressing a thought, to die a Wikipedian.

A vehicle for lobbying local legislatures is as good an explanation as any that I've ever seen for why these Chapters even exist.
User avatar
CrowsNest
 
Posts: 4459
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby Strelnikov » Sun Sep 02, 2018 12:59 pm

Graaf Statler wrote:
Lobby groups behind a high profile campaign on Wikipedia urging a switch to US-style copyright law in Australia have links to interests, including multinationals such as Google, which will gain substantially from any change to a so-called “fair use” system......The links are undeclared when Australian visitors to Wikipedia, which is run by registered charity Wikimedia Australia, are asked to email their local federal member of parliament......The Wikimedia Foundation told Business Insider: “Google is one of many donors that contributes to the Wikimedia Foundation, and their contributions have not influenced Wikipedia’s involvement in the fair use campaign in Australia.

I wouldn't call them lobby groups, I call them a bunch of idiots. Lobby groups are widely accepted, and there are even professional lobbyists, that is not he point. The point is democracy. The free source movement with it's US-style copyright law is only in Europe supported by the piratenparty, a party with one MEP in the European parlement and with hardly any voters. The other party's don't support fair use.
How are these "lobbyists' like Romaine, Gelach, Dimi, etc thinking to overrule the democratic chosen Eurlo parlement with a vision what is not supported by the European parliaments and the European population? Just by doing it and waiting till the man with the hammer comes by? Because that is the result at they end. Gekkenwerk we call this in Holland, the work of a fool. Because, even if the European parement should embrace there US-style copyright law , what will not happened of course, it is a complete pyrrhus victory. Because licences and copyright in Europa is a local matter of the different national parlement. There is no European copyright, and I doubt if there will ever be a European copyright seen the political situation as it is in Europe.


Certainly it's fool's work, but Wikipedia was built on free labor, so their lobbying is free as well. It makes them look like scrappy underdogs, when in truth they are Google's allies....it's a ploy.

Image

How depressing a thought, to die a Wikipedian.


Look upon the fuzzy mouth of Lankiveil; his neckbeard covered his face.
Still "Globally Banned" on Wikipedia for the high crime of journalism.
User avatar
Strelnikov
Psyop
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:25 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby AndrewForson » Sun Sep 02, 2018 1:11 pm

Strelnikov wrote:Certainly it's fool's work, but Wikipedia was built on free labor, so their lobbying is free as well. It makes them look like scrappy underdogs, when in truth they are Google's allies....it's a ploy.

Indeed. Big Silicon Valley companies using WMF as a cut-out.
User avatar
AndrewForson
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:56 pm

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby Graaf Statler » Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:44 pm

I can find it back. On a certain moment I found somewhere hidden, we declare Wikipedia NL is not under the Dutch law. As a statement. I was still editing with my first account Sir Statler. And I was thinking hu? We declare? Dutch Wikipedians? Strange.
So, I asked a few questions about it. And what then happened is indescribable. A person Brimz, a tremendous jerk, Paul Bedson has met him too started with the help of this page to "proof" I was a trol.

He started shouting you are a troll, of course MoiraMoira was there shouting troll too and others. Only because of that question. And from that moment on I understood there was something terrible wrong in the Dutch chapter, because they are both WMNL members. I was already a paria, but after this incident it was terrible there behaving to me. And still there is something terrible wrong there.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby ericbarbour » Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:41 pm

Strelnikov wrote:Certainly it's fool's work, but Wikipedia was built on free labor, so their lobbying is free as well. It makes them look like scrappy underdogs, when in truth they are Google's allies....it's a ploy.

Yup

Look upon the fuzzy mouth of Lankiveil; his neckbeard covered his face.

OMG OUTING OUTING OUTING!!!!! LOL
#BbbGate
User avatar
ericbarbour
Psyop
 
Posts: 1660
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:56 pm
Location: #Bbb23

Re: Blog post on WMAU, Australia's Wikipedia chapter

Postby ericbarbour » Tue Sep 04, 2018 7:32 pm

At least we don't have to bring up Stephen Bain anymore....

You need not worry. That wacko will reappear in Wikimedia World sooner or later. Jimboo loves them obsessed cannon-fodder types.....

We should talk about Ambi more often, despite being "history" since 2012. She was a totally rotten, bizarre, irrational being. Psychiatric professionals probably would have had a field day trying to characterize her many problems. And she took them out; first on DMOZ, then on Wikipedia users.

Wanna see a perfect example of Ambi's "early good deeds"? She did things like the following, because she was a DMOZ administrator, and just like Wikipedia later, the DMOZ admins didn't want to see any bad publicity about or negative coverage of DMOZ. So they went around snivelling their way onto other websites, and censoring any commentary about DMOZ's incredibly corrupt/bonkers inner culture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... id=1129497
#BbbGate
User avatar
ericbarbour
Psyop
 
Posts: 1660
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:56 pm
Location: #Bbb23

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests