How did they do it? My opinion - it might be likened to politics, where an editor calls up a friend, and calls in a favor. His method - he uses several screen names and is careful not to use more than one in a single article. He encourages friends of his several screen names to get involved in an AfD. Some have called wikipedia a Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Game (MMORG) where you win when your point of view overwhelms your opponent who shouldn't have volunteered his opposition, anyway. You use communication lines outside of discussion pages. For a high school student, it is a big win to overcome your adult (or expert) opponent. You have raised your voice higher than an adult or expert. The validity of the information is trivial compared to winning against an adult / expert. I think I would characterize it as a Massive Multiplayer Online Political Game. In a game like that, it only makes sense to maintain several screen names, each with a circle of friends, else how can you quash your opponents? Terryeo 06:41, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

Boy do I agree with you, Fred! Every gram of knowledge is somebody's opinion, or an agreement of opinions. Even the Supreme Court of the USA, arguably a most reputable opinion, has changed interpretation of their fixed document, the Constitution, a time or two.

This comment made me laugh:


Is that true? Is every gram of knowledge simply "somebody's opinion" and an "agreement of opinions"? (rhetorically asked of course)

And is the Supreme Court of the USA, "arguably a most reputable opinion"? Not being particularly familiar with the various U.S. constitutional habits, I was quite surprised to learn that people considered this political institution to be reputable at all, let alone that it represented some notion of authority on the Universe.

This comment made me laugh:

Is that true? Is every gram of knowledge simply "somebody's opinion" and an "agreement of opinions"? (rhetorically asked of course)

And is the Supreme Court of the USA, "arguably a most reputable opinion"? Not being particularly familiar with the various U.S. constitutional habits, I was quite surprised to learn that people considered this political institution to be reputable at all, let alone that it represented some notion of authority on the Universe.