Forum:Wikitruth

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Wikitruth

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6451 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

This made for an entertaining read: Wikitruth. Can we hold our hands up and say we are not in the same boat as Wikipedia on this? Wish I could answer that one, but I admittedly do not hang around here often enough these days. --IMBJR 15:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, we found this months ago. Also, you may want to tell RC not to euthanize you.--<<>> 16:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Shows you how much I've been keeping tabs. No wonder they want me capped. However, I'm not against the idea. I've often thought about getting myself de-clawed. --IMBJR 19:07, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

One Wikipedia member wrote an article called Psychophobia and contributed to the Chavez article and posted a quote from Chavez calling Bush the devil. Because the Wikipedia member identified himself as mentally ill, an admin removed the quote, and when the member asked why they gave him a Pro-Chavez rant on the talk page from an anonymous IP. He talked about the thought police at Wikipedia like Wikitruth says, and they ganged up on him on the Chavez talk page. Maybe we should invite him here to add to the Hugo Chavez article? It could use some work. Also someone needs to make a psychophobia article and link it to Wikiphrenia or something. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 17:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

We should definitely invite him over, for tea and cookies at the very least. But be aware that some people might get a little suspicious about the fact that "Lukey, a False Orion" is a valid anagram for "Loke Laufeyiarson"... Caution is advised!  c • > • cunwapquc? 19:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Damn, another False Orion. I am the original, all the others are just imitators. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 17:18, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I do love that site. See, I love Wiki as well, but it's becoming a cold and dark place for a sane man. 21:15, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I was sorta pissed off when they started taking my name in vain, but I get emails from people thinking I am linked to the site. I'm increasingly thinking Wikipedia's biggest critics are all, each and every one of them, certifiably batshit insane. I'll get back to you when I have hard data on this one.

The winnah of course is Andrew Orlowski using Wikitruth as a source for Register articles. I'm eagerly awaiting him doing that for a Guardian piece so I can threaten a Press Council complaint again - David Gerard 10:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't be much worse than anyone else using wikipedia as a source for anything else. I enjoy reading wikitruth, I like that style of writing - I'm pretty sure any of them would be welcome to put some of their humour here. That and it's always interesting to see just how mind-numbingly stupid some wikipedians can be! • Spang • ☃ • talk • 21:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Did you see today's article in the Guardian? This Seth Finkelstein guy seems fairly sane, by most modern standards anyway. And no mention of Wikitruth.info... Now there's someone I wouldn't mind being mistaken for!  c • > • cunwapquc? 03:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the word you're looking for is "lucid" rather than "sane" - David Gerard 13:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you think the Wiki fork-thingy will work? 07:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia is too soupy at this point; they'll need a Wiki spoon-thingy to eat it all properly. However, that "Citizendium" thingy shows some promise... You should ask David about that, though - he seems to have become rather active on their mailing list.  c • > • cunwapquc? 00:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Not since Larry got pissed off at the mailing list having discussion on it and locked it down to eight posts total a day. (I suspect he has greatly misunderstood the concept.) If Citizendium is going to carefully and correctly go over a cliff, at least it should do so for a reason that isn't BLOODY STUPID - David Gerard 13:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

David, did you not get the memo about that? I can't imagine why they wouldn't want you to know about the spiffy new web board they put up to replace that kludgy old mailing list... It must've been a simple, uh, oversight?  c • > • cunwapquc? 01:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Like I'm going to bother tracking yet another frickin' web site. Anyone who gets upset that people are using a discussion mailing list as, uh, a discussion mailing list is, uh. Larry is a way SMRT guy and his Wikipedia history was only wanting to work with people he had no difficulty working with and only in the particular way he wanted to work. Which is fair enough, but he tried to enforce it. The problem with Wikipedia is that working with idiots is not optional. Though if it helps, they think you're an idiot too. There's not really a way around this one, it's a problem of being in a volunteer organisation with 20,000 people all in the same place - David Gerard 10:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Davey boy, chill out. Mailing lists are so 20th century, the 21st century migrated to web forums. As a matter of fact, you are using a web forum right now. Oh gosh, yet another web site for you to track. I guess your web browser does not support favorites or bookmarks? Cry me a river because my Firefox bookmarks are over one megabyte in size, and while archived I can easily access it and use the search feature to find the bookmarks I need. Failing that, there is a search engine called Google and failing that there is Yahoo and other search engines to track web sites with and find them. Maybe one day you will learn to stop living in 1992 and join the rest of us. Maybe upgrade your Lynx browser to Firefox, stop using Pine for email and switch to Thunderbird and track web forums via RSS feeds that you can easily check in Thunderbird. I guess then that means you have to stop using your 286 (don't make me laugh. Your windows boots up in what, a day and a half?) with MS-DOS 3.3, Windows 3.0, and a DOS FOSSLE TCP/IP NDIS Modem driver with SLIP and PPP protocols, and use a hard drive in the gigabyte range (You can back up your whole hard drive on one floppy diskette, you're the biggest joke on the Internet) and give up your technical problems (your database is a disaster, you're waxing your modem to try to make it go faster) and improve your financial situation (Hey fella, I bet youre still livin in your parents cellar. Downloadin pictures of Sarah Michelle Gellar. And postin me too! like some brain-dead aol-er. I should do the world a favor and cap you like old yeller. Youre just about as useless as jpegs to Hellen Keller.) With respect to Weird Al Yankovic, It's all about the Pentiums! --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 21:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

"Davey Boy?" 286? MS-DOS 3.3? Parents cellar? Them's fightin' words! Geek fightin' words. It's graphics calculators at high noon, boys. No need to be uncivil. Uncivil with Spock ears.--Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

No, those are obviously Romulan ears, not Spock ears, the correct term would be Vulcan ears because Spock is a Vulcan. It would not be graphic calculators at noon, it would be PDAs at noon via WiFi, the first one to send the "Ping of Death" to the other's PDA wins. If we really want to be uncivil we can debate in Klingon and challenge each other to a bat'leth contest. Like Weird Al Yankovic, we are both White and Nerdy. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 14:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Well now, let's try to be objectiviste about this. While this may appear on the surface to be a somewhat incoherent "rant" on Orion's part, he makes a good point: Web forums (fora?) are, quite simply, much more appropriate for high-volume discussions about a wide variety of specialized topics. Mailing lists are ideal if your intent is to comment on every conceivable topic that come up, especially if those comments are likely to be negative - but regardless, they're generally rather limited in terms of maintaining civility and constructive discourse in a diverse community. With a web forum, or even a "wiki," you can pick and choose topics that interest you, instead of having to scroll down through a bewildering myriad of topics you don't care about; moreover, some people are forced to use web-only e-mail, which makes the usability of such lists even worse. It may be that David here is disenchanted with the idea of having to "track" an additional website of the many he undoubtedly frequents currently, and we should respect his preference in this regard. But I would think that most people who have a genuine interest in constructively participating in new online encyclopedia projects, and who are aware of the many different problems involved in organizing such an endeavor, would greatly prefer a system that allowed for more efficient use of time and greater ability to concentrate on areas of specific interest to each individual. Also, I heard Sarah Michelle Gellar was going to be "Chief Constable."  c • > • cunwapquc? 01:38, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Exactly what I tried to say before my schizo-affective disorder got the better of me and almost started a flamewar geek style. Web Fora (the correct plural of forums is fora, IIRC) are the next generation CMS (Content Management Systems) and are also a vital part of the Wikia (Correct plural of Wiki, IIRC) web sites out there. Yes in the sixth grade venacular, they allow you to weed out all of the crap, and just find the messages you are interested in. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 14:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, web sites designed on Etch-a-Sketches. Got it - David Gerard 15:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah something like that, don't forget that you shake them in order to reboot them. Still not as awesome as the Commodore Maddox computer though. I mean a computer designed for pirates how cool is that? The Commodore Maddox computer signals the end of Internet 1.0 and Web 1.0, and the start of the Internet 2.0 and the Web 2.0 and a complete corporate raiding takeover of all IPOS by Pirates. --2nd_Lt Orion Blastar (talk) 16:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

IS SHE??!?! I mean, o rly. I may bother looking if or when there's a "there" there. It would be nice, if Citizendium crashes and dies, if it did so for a reason that wasn't stupid - David Gerard 10:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a great idea - but who on earth is going to edit it? Editing Wiki is like being the President, anyone who wants to do it is almost by definition someone you don't want doing it. 16:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Ha! That's a fine quote there, FM! Is it one of yours, and if so, would you mind if I use it in my book? I'll put in a thank-you to your username... Along with, "Wikipedia is like a field of beautiful flowers run by guys on riding mowers," I think it may be destined for the Top Ten! I wish I knew the answer to your question, though. I suspect I'm not the only one, either.  c • > • cunwapquc? 01:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Any American who is prepared to run for President should automatically, by definition, be disqualified from ever doing so. Gore Vidal. A quick search suggests this was it, although I paraphrased a little. I think the sentiment applies to our friends at Wiki, though. 15:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Uncyclomedia Foundation#CitizUnDium - David Gerard 15:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I can't handle the wikitruth. 09:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)