Full Version: Ron Livingston, growth, and Wikipedia
And from the blog entry;
And perhaps that’s my worry about a smaller user community than was here in 2007. As the number of articles increase, are there enough watchdogs to keep article quality high, or are other technical measures (flagged revisions, semi-protection, et al.) needed for maintaining quality?
Obviously not
QUOTE
And perhaps that’s my worry about a smaller user community than was here in 2007. As the number of articles increase, are there enough watchdogs to keep article quality high, or are other technical measures (flagged revisions, semi-protection, et al.) needed for maintaining quality?
Obviously not
My Comment —
I see that you subscribe to the Wikipediot Policy of WP:NOX (No Original Excuses).
All these years after Seigenthaler, and all you can come up with is WP:BTV (Blame The Victim) cop-outs like the following:
It's his fault for not being famous enough to deserve a non-defamatory article.
Then, to top it all off, you amplify the defamation by referring to the Streisand effect:
It's his fault for trying to censor information — information that "wants to be free" of little details like responsibility and truth.
Oh, and let's not forget the icing on the cake:
It's his fault for being a bad old gay-basher.
Well, it has nothing to do with that, as anyone who does any amount of Investigative Journalism at all can see:
It’s the Casting Director Lee Dennison Story!
Jon Awbrey, Beethoven's Birthday, 2009
QUOTE
I see that you subscribe to the Wikipediot Policy of WP:NOX (No Original Excuses).
All these years after Seigenthaler, and all you can come up with is WP:BTV (Blame The Victim) cop-outs like the following:
It's his fault for not being famous enough to deserve a non-defamatory article.
Then, to top it all off, you amplify the defamation by referring to the Streisand effect:
It's his fault for trying to censor information — information that "wants to be free" of little details like responsibility and truth.
Oh, and let's not forget the icing on the cake:
It's his fault for being a bad old gay-basher.
Well, it has nothing to do with that, as anyone who does any amount of Investigative Journalism at all can see:
It’s the Casting Director Lee Dennison Story!
Jon Awbrey, Beethoven's Birthday, 2009
QUOTE(Alison @ Wed 16th December 2009, 2:51am) 
And from the blog entry;
QUOTE
And perhaps that’s my worry about a smaller user community than was here in 2007. As the number of articles increase, are there enough watchdogs to keep article quality high, or are other technical measures (flagged revisions, semi-protection, et al.) needed for maintaining quality?
Obviously not
Yep. Somehow one can never catch these guys in open debate, where you can pull their pants down. They've been getting away with this act for years, now. "Yes we know that our giant dirty gossip dissemination machine hurts real people! And this hurts us! Because we're all nice guys! We're looking into new TECHNICAL ways to minimize this damage! Yes, we are!"
I'm beginning to share Jon's view that the rest of media seem to be "in" on this game in some odd way, since no large source of information (certainly not the Wall Street Journal, as we see) has shown any remote interest in getting at the truth of this matter. Ah, perhaps just laziness. Never attribute malace when laziness and ignorance explains things better.
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Wed 16th December 2009, 12:43pm)
Yep. Somehow one can never catch these guys in open debate, where you can pull their pants down. They've been getting away with this act for years, now. "Yes we know that our giant dirty gossip dissemination machine hurts real people! And this hurts us! Because we're all nice guys! We're looking into new TECHNICAL ways to minimize this damage! Yes, we are!"
I'm beginning to share Jon's view that the rest of media seem to be "in" on this game in some odd way, since no large source of information (certainly not the Wall Street Journal, as we see) has shown any remote interest in getting at the truth of this matter. Ah, perhaps just laziness. Never attribute malace when laziness and ignorance explains things better.
And I really love Lih's slipping in that EXXON WALEDEEZ defense —
But those nasty old oil tankers are JUST TOO DAMN BIG to pilot around those little old oceans without bumping into stuff now and again … and again … and again …
It's THE GROWTH that made us do it !!!
Jon
Andrew Lih was kind enough to make this response to my comment on his blog.
I replied as follows:
Andrew,
I read what you wrote, and I can see that you wished to exculpate yourself from the spin of the WSJ interview.
But your phrasing, wittingly or otherwise, is tributary to a long-running stream of rhetoric that besplatters the victims more than the perps.
So I’m sure you’ll be more anticipatory of that likelihood in future e-missions.
Jon Awbrey, 22 Dec 2009 (his blog clock is running a day ahead of ours)
I replied as follows:
QUOTE
Andrew,
I read what you wrote, and I can see that you wished to exculpate yourself from the spin of the WSJ interview.
But your phrasing, wittingly or otherwise, is tributary to a long-running stream of rhetoric that besplatters the victims more than the perps.
So I’m sure you’ll be more anticipatory of that likelihood in future e-missions.
Jon Awbrey, 22 Dec 2009 (his blog clock is running a day ahead of ours)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.