Have you been keeping up with the brouhaha surrounding John Edwards’ child out of wedlock? I guess he was so concerned with the plight of single parents that he went and created a test subject! Kaus and Roger Simon have been on the case, but like Watergate, the real interesting thing is the cover up.
Which has now spread to Wikipedia, as the high minded progressive gatekeepers go through increasingly bizarre contortions to justify their bias:
However, given three-quarters of the references are from either the Huffington Post (blog), the Slate (blog), The National Enquirer (rag), Gawker.com (blog), or (best) the Media Research Center (conspiracy theorists who believe the liberal media is out to destroy the world) …
Like my unindicted co conspirator the Unix_Jedi noted, where the hell does Wiki, the all-encompassing blog that any idiot can edit, get off calling blogs poor sources?!
unix_jedi: I love how Wikipedia derides blogs as authority for claims
unix_jedi: I really, really, think that’s hilarious
pdb: damn
pdb: that didn’t occur to me
pdb: but that is sublime
Unix-Jedi | 05-Aug-08 at 9:33 am | Permalink
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/Wikipedia
“If I told you I had a bucket and showed you the bucket, would you ask for a newspaper article to prove I had a bucket?”
—-210.9.136.63 (talk) 12:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
“Yes. Yes, we would. That’s the way it works on Wikipedia.”
—FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) in which participants play editors of a hypothetical online encyclopedia. The goal is to try to insert misinformation that is randomly assigned at signup, while preventing any contrary information from being entered by others. Players with similar misinformation will generally form “guilds” in order to aid one another.
Wikipedia players gain more authority as they progress, with “Administrator” and “Double-O Licensed” rankings granting them access to game processes not available to others.
If it weren’t so true, it wouldn’t be so funny.
TD | 06-Aug-08 at 7:36 am | Permalink
That’s… well, you know.
homebru | 07-Aug-08 at 7:31 am | Permalink
Wiki doesn’t suck; some people do, though.
DirtCrashr | 07-Aug-08 at 1:30 pm | Permalink
As people merge their identities with online resources and Borgify themselves, authoritarian elements like Wikipedia are necessary to sustain their belief in themselves as a discrete entity.
Wiki sux.