Cade Metz does it again.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wi..._and_overstock/

For your Digging convenience, please click here.

Metz is setting the bar high for detailed and accurate coverage of WP's dysfunction.

This one will probably make it into Criticism of Wikipedia too.

I'm thinking "not".

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wi..._and_overstock/

Cade Metz is going medieval on WP's ass


Dear W-R: pls merge/del this thread, didnt see wordbomb had already scooped it

HERESY! Democracy and totalitarianism are not mutually exclusive. Wikipedia, through the magic of user-contributed content, has created a system that manages to take into account the opinions of the populace without actually doing so!

oops, sorry there word, didn't see this thread before i thought i was scooping it first.

I did enjoy reading all about the inability of the guy that banned me to answer Mr Metz's inquiries. Mr FU wouldn't answer mine either.

not much of a spokesman.

Quiet, and has a very limited vocabulary of unimaginative insults.

I thought this was a pretty decent piece, and do like how Tobias is quoted as an impartial voice.

It let off Mantanmoreland pretty lightly, but then I guess people can go to Antisocialmedia.net as the article mentions, and see for themselves what was going on with that particular journalist.

I think this thread and several like it belong in Media …

Jonny

the 'hottest' threads lately have all been about WP in the Register, Guardian, etc.

The media subsection is at the bottom of W-R, and to be frank, I really don't notice "new" threads in it as there are dozens of automated threads in it.

meanwhile, "general discussion" is at the top of the page - and appears to be a magnet for what's hot now.

How bout let it stay here as long as "hot", and move it "media" when it cools down? I've missed several hot threads that get buried low-down on the WP front page in media.

I'm being selfish again ;-)



Not being Mr. Metz myself, it's entirely a coincidence that I ever edited the Metz, France article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=135380155


Unlike Mantanmoreland's editing of the Varkala, India article.

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2006/10/17/..._1017weiss.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=53762562

Also Dan Tobias got scolded by the reptilian JoshuaZ for taking matters off wiki.


Boo hoo.

Did Gary Weiss really claim that he had never edited Wikipedia? Incredible.

Wikipedia does have a serious problem, compounded by its inability to solve its problems in-house in a mature, professional, and ethical manner.

Wikipedia fails to live up to the requirements of a Learning Organization, because it lacks functional components essential to organizational learning.

Any media project as large as Wikipedia that manifests such a problematic learning disability is inevitably going to become a subject of examination by the public media.

I fail to see why Dan Tobias should give JoshuaZ or anyone else the time of day as to whom, what or where Dan discusses WP with anyone.

Its not a Freemasonic Lodge where he is bound by terrible oaths to never discuss the secrets with the "profane".

The plain fact is that things like this happen all of the time because high up mucky-mucks refuse to lance the open wounds represented by an ever increasing number of dangerous and unstable people who have cornered the WP market.

He should tell Joshua to mind his own business.

If WP had a Non-Disclosure Agreement, that would make it a closed organization with a Social Contract.

Having a Social Contract is a good idea, but Wikipedia, being a public encyclopedia that "anyone can edit" cannot be a closed organization.

Therefore, if it did have a Social Contract, the terms would have to anticipate that everything taking place on Wikipedia would take place in the open light of day, subject to public observation and commentary.

A site which purports to serve the public interest must be answerable to the public.

And that means it must be answerable to the media that serves the public.

NOTHING SHORT OF HILARIOUS - JoshuaZ scolds Dan T. for his comments in The Register article


Hey Joshua, you said it, we didn't. You don't have the maturity to handle your disagreements and and that is a serious problem. Dan's been talking sense to your kind for months, and you've ignored him and done everything short of attack him, which you can't do because Dan is 100 times more cantakerous than you are. Therefore, he was forced to talk to the newspapers about it, because that's one of the few options you have in such as situation. So yes, Joshua (nailed IT!) Zelinsky, you have a problem. A collective, longstanding problem. Deal with it.
Liar. You've done everything to subvert the sensible comments Dan has politely and tactfully made to you for the past year. Now hush your piehole. And learn to spell "their". You are trying to be a lawyer, aren't you? Oh, and on that note, respect for due process would something remarkable for you to learn before completing law school. Ask your professor about it.
What went through his mind.... hum.... speaking the truth? .... moral duty to report abuse of power which affects society? ... frustration at viewing a monolith of longstanding managerial incompetence? ....good-intentioned desire to replace moral collapse with positive change? And your problem with that is, Joshua?

Joshua.... what kind of lawyer are you planning to be? The kind that chews people out for speaking the truth?
I suppose your usual tactic of online defamation doesn't count as a tabloid, but hey, what do I know? Yes you do. And how poorly that reflects on you as overseers of a serious project.
Mr. Zelinsky. All the major papers read this, and they are monitoring the situation pretty carefully. You'd be best to hold your fingers silent. Because your words will be online in a few years when you are denying you never supported this huge mess.
Spoken like the true model of maturity. The guy who spent his free time rewriting Daniel Brandt's name into the PIR article. The guy who recreated the Daniel Brandt talk page. I could go on all day, but for the puerile Mr. Zelinsky to dress down Dan Tobias for not measuring up to maturity standards is nothing short of hilarious.


Now Joshua, wipe your eyes, dry your face, and come downstairs and stop kicking the wall. Your mama's got some warm fresh cookies and milk for you.

I submitted it to Slashdot. Hope they accept it.

edit: http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=415035

The Register is many things, some of which I disapprove of, but it is emphatically not a tabloid!

They did. It's on the front page now.

how long, do you think, before one of the usual suspects tries to pronounce a damnatio memoriae on the Register? (and will they use technical means -- abuse of the spam blacklist -- or by conventional -- as with will beback and Making Light?) they've now decided that it's not a reliable source, that if it says one thing and one of them disagrees with it then it may not be cited.
Cberlet
Jossi
JzG
JzG again
Jossi expounds
JzG and SamiHarris (note how the former yaps about BLP and blatantly ignores it three hours later -- "vicious hatemonger" etc. -- others have already called him out on this).

Andrew Gray lays out the problem neatly

The madness one has to undertake to try so hard to deny that a website like WR exists and then also put so much time and energy into chasing ghosts associated with said website must be staggering. I would love to see a photo of JzG's eyes a couple years back compared to now. I bet they're 50% wider...

Isn't he the one who gave the "get thee to a nunnery out of here" speech to SlimVirgin and Jayjg last August?

If so, they should have a coup d'etat and put him in Jimbo's spot.

The irony being that EVERYONE knows about WR now because of those people who keep trying to get it removed from Wikipedia's awareness.

Oh I know. If they'd have ignored us, none of this BIG SCANDAL would have happened.

Durova would still be back in business, for example, and none of this Shakespearean drama would be playing out online.

(gets out popcorn)

The bit that burns Wikipedia's cabal is here is yet another scandal they cannot oversight, send to ArbCom, or ban the participants.

Which is exactly why they are trying so hard to control the discussion on Wikipedia. Quite a few zealous admins have been blocking people for, quite literally, asking the wrong questions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ANI#Metsguy234
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ANI#User:Takenages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ANI#Block_...ser_talk:Durova

Not that they'd learn anything different watching Jimbo...

Google News did something strange with their indexing of the naked short-selling article in The Register. Last night they carried the link on Google News within an hour or so as usual, but they didn't index the word "slimvirgin," even though it was in the subtitle of that article.

Today they indexed the Slashdot post, and they did something strange once again, this time in the opposite direction! Apparently they picked up the link to last July's Slashdotting of SlimVirgin that was offered by Slashdot as a "Related Stories" reference in their current post. Ouch! That snippet snaps right at you! Here it is, in case they fix it:

With that pic of Jimbo from BBC, where the "007" sign shows in the background, one wonders if there's a Russian mole in the BBC photographer's pool. But Google? I know Sergey's family is from Russia, but that's ridiculous!

Besides, why not just let the air out of JzG's bicycle tires, or steal his helmet? That would put him out of the picture for at least a week. Oh wait — JzG is doing more damage to Wikipedia right where he is. It's smart to leave him alone.

Perhaps the inscrutable listing is a reflection of Google's sooper-sekrit defenses against the machinations of the Search Engine Optimization Brigade.

There's a pretty lengthy discussion going on here.

Has Joshua Zelinsky been sniffing Glue?

As opposed to bully power as an admin?


This isn't ABOUT the community, you moron.

Joshua, do you have a brain? You are quoting wiki-isms, that bear no relation to the situation at hand.

Yes, well, as we clarified earlier Joshua, in your attack on Dan Tobias, that Wikipedian problems can't be handled successfully to general societal satisfaction (I mean a REAL society, not your community) we find ourselves forced to cope with it in another sphere.

How old is this kid? He talks like he's 12.

Probably; much like this lawyer.