home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   soc.culture.china      Apparently more than just Tik Tok?      155,085 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 153,707 of 155,085   
   Oleg Smirnov to All   
   wikipedia   
   10 Aug 25 11:30:39   
   
   XPost: alt.russian.z1, talk.politics.misc, alt.politics   
   XPost: soc.culture.russian   
   From: os333@netc.eu   
      
    webpronews.com   
      
   Elon Musk Agrees to Ban Wikipedia from X Community Notes ..   
      
   ...   
      
   The very idea of Wikipedia implies it shall be internally   
   contradictory, by design. In different articles, some event   
   or person might be covered with different assessments. There   
   also might be notable discrepancies between versions of the   
   same article in different languages. Discordance is natural   
   when content is created with the participation of various   
   and many enthusiasts/activists, whose experiences, cultural   
   backgrounds and perspectives differ. Guidelines to cite and   
   refer to reputable / neutral sources surely serve to ennoble   
   it, but it cannot eliminate discrepancies, because sources   
   seeming reputable for some groups of Wikipedia enthusiasts   
   may not seem so for other groups. Such an internally   
   controversial product nevertheless might have value as sort   
   of great exhibition of existing - accepted or suggested -   
   facts, beliefs and narratives, and diversity of views and   
   stands even contributes to popularity. But, it's definitely   
   not fit to be "a judge" in disputes or a fact-checking tool.   
      
   Moreover, the above is written in the idealistic assumption   
   that the Wikipedia content is created by honest, sincere and   
   selfless enthusiasts. In real life, as soon as something   
   enthusiasm-driven becomes popular, there are powers seeking   
   to adapt it for serving their particular interest. Wikipedia   
   was not an exception. Still, for pretty big number of topics   
   it remains to be a useful source of information. However, it   
   has become increasingly biased and unreliable, even fiction-   
   bearing when it comes to *sensitive topics, somehow related   
   to cultist and political indoctrination, to various kinds of   
   present and past conflicts.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca