Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ News Worth Discussing _ Mike Godwin, "reporter"

Posted by: EricBarbour

Did you know that Mike Godwin occasionally writes for Reason, that famous libertarian rag?

Did you know that Mike http://reason.com/archives/2011/10/28/what-happened-at-occupy-oaklan?

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE
I saw a great number of motorcycle police whose insignia showed that they were from San Jose. It’s a bit of a hike to get here from San Jose a police motorcycle, but they had still come out in force to hold down the perimeter.

Mike must not be familiar with the http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=35263, "Nobody wants to live in San José, not as an inherent thing." Obviously, these San Jose police were just trying to do as everyone tries to do -- get out of San Jose.


QUOTE
I don’t know how to interpret everything I saw, and I can’t state with any authority what Occupy Oakland or any of the other protests ultimately mean.

Well, at least Mike is more humbly candid about his journalist and historian skills than he ever was about his legal prowess. Maybe taking that step down from the world-famous Wikimedia Foundation to the less-famous MadRiver Entertainment gig has given Godwin a new sense of humanity and of humility.

Posted by: thekohser

The comments in response to Godwin's article are amusing, too. Reason apparently attracts a higher class of reader:

QUOTE

fish|10.28.11 @ 6:23PM|#

Rather you really need to develop some sort of social life. Anything.



Episiarch|10.28.11 @ 6:49PM|#

No, you're just retarded. Full retard.




rather |10.28.11 @ 6:48PM|#

I see you've been having fun with yourself again.

Honey, why don't you go back to masturbating and entertain both your little brains?




LOL|10.29.11 @ 1:19AM|#

Epi darling, tarran is confused. When I said I wanted to bang you on the head, I meant your drug addled brain, not your micropenis.

I see the confusion, same size, same IQ, and same leakage issue




Then again, there is this very insightful comment that must make Godwin, Reason, and libertarians squirm a bit:
QUOTE
"Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment...unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares?" ~Murray Rothbard

How is the OPD's aggression to defend property values in the city not in accordance with the wishes of the founder of Libertarianism, and dean of the Austrian school of Economics?

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 29th October 2011, 6:51am) *

Did you know that Mike Godwin occasionally writes for Reason, that famous libertarian rag?

Did you know that Mike http://reason.com/archives/2011/10/28/what-happened-at-occupy-oaklan?


I got into a huge fight with the idiot on Durova's Facebook page when he was trying to spread disinformation and claim that the protesters were peaceful and that none of them threw rocks, picked up a fence and tossed it at the police, started throwing filled bottles, large pipes, etc. The guy isn't a libertarian but a plain old fashion California liberal. He barely gets anything written anywhere and shouldn't be trusted in any fashion.

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 29th October 2011, 10:51am) *

Did you know that Mike http://reason.com/archives/2011/10/28/what-happened-at-occupy-oaklan?


Apparently the Oakland protesters were literally read the riot act on October 25th (California Penal Code Section 409).

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 29th October 2011, 12:30pm) *

Then again, there is this very insightful comment that must make Godwin, Reason, and libertarians squirm a bit:


That's the problem with designating someone or something as "libertarian". It gets used for such diametrically opposed things...

There's a good possibility that some police used excessive force on October 25th. On the other hand, the whole "Occupy Wall Street" movement was begun as a call to use force ("go out and seize a square of singular symbolic significance and put our asses on the line to make it happen", http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/adbusters-blog/occupywallstreet.html)

Posted by: Michaeldsuarez

QUOTE(anthony @ Sun 30th October 2011, 11:24pm) *

There's a good possibility that some police used excessive force on October 25th. On the other hand, the whole "Occupy Wall Street" movement was begun as a call to use force ("go out and seize a square of singular symbolic significance and put our asses on the line to make it happen", http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/adbusters-blog/occupywallstreet.html)


Be wary of those who claim that their protests are peaceful. They want police brutality. Ever since Gandhi, protesters have always sought to provoke law enforcement into committing acts that doesn't make the established order look good. The media and public go crazy for that stuff, and the crowd knows it.

Here's Coulter on the subject in Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America:

QUOTE
Connor was a machine-politics, pro-union Democrat who had been elected to the Democratic National Committee from Alabama. He was also a vile racist, endorsed by Alabama’s Democratic, segregationist governor, George Wallace. After witnessing Connor’s brutal tactics to enforce segregation, the good citizens of Birmingham stepped in to remove him from his position as Commissioner of Public Safety. Birmingham’s middle class, business leaders, and Jewish community weren’t interested in having beery KKK nightriders in their town. First, they voted to eliminate Connor’s office; then — to be extra clear — they decisively voted against Connor when he ran for mayor.

It was over — responsible citizens and civil rights advocates had won. But Martin Luther King planned one last protest before Connor’s term expired. City merchants, including the black millionaire A.G. Gaston, opposed King’s protest on the grounds that Connor had already been beaten at the ballot box. On the day of Connor’s electoral defeat, Burke Marshall, a champion of civil rights in Kennedy’s Justice Department, called King and asked him to call off the Birmingham protests.

But King decided to deliberately provoke Connor, who was insane. This was a way to extend the movement, just as, years later, King would branch out from racial justice into “social justice.”

With television crews crawling all over Birmingham, King arranged for hundreds of black children to march on the city. As expected, this led to a total conflagration when Connor turned fire hoses and police dogs on little children, some as young as six years old. The explosive images from this confrontation were instantly broadcast around the world.

King had stoked this incredible fire to ignite his dying movement — dying because civil rights had won in the courts, at the ballot box, and in the hearts and minds of Americans. But King and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference's Wyatt Walker were “overjoyed” at the mayhem they had caused. Walker gloated, “There never was any more skillful manipulation of the news media than there was in Birmingham.”


These people want violence. The crowdsourced Wikipedia article on that march is little more than a stub:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Crusade_%28civil_rights%29

A quote from Malcolm X is the only piece of criticism included.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Mon 31st October 2011, 8:51am) *

The crowdsourced Wikipedia article on that march is little more than a stub:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Crusade_%28civil_rights%29


That may be because (according to one leading Wikipedia expert) http://www.examiner.com/wiki-edits-in-national/leading-wikipedian-explains-why-blacks-don-t-volunteer, and so they don't help Wikipedia, the world's greatest volunteer project.


Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 31st October 2011, 4:41pm) *


That may be because (according to one leading Wikipedia expert) http://www.examiner.com/wiki-edits-in-national/leading-wikipedian-explains-why-blacks-don-t-volunteer, and so they don't help Wikipedia, the world's greatest volunteer project.

It is hard to believe that a former arbitrator could have made such comment, or maybe it is not hard to believe. After all they all are bunch of fakes. A decent person would probably never apply for arbcom in a first place, and, if he would, and gets elected, he'd become a fake and a bureaucrat as all others, simply to keep his tools.

Another question: how they know how many women or African Americans are editing wikipedia.
Most users are anonymous, are they not?

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Mon 31st October 2011, 1:07pm) *

Another question: how they know how many women or African Americans are editing wikipedia.
Most users are anonymous, are they not?


They know from the responses to user-targeted surveys that are returned to the research team conducting the research. Of course, with most of the survey plans I've seen the Wikimedia Foundation execute, there is an utter disregard (or lack of basic knowledge of) probability sampling techniques. So, much of the data and the insights drawn therefrom are potentially botched, but nobody seems to care.

Posted by: mnemonic

Glad you all found the Occupy Oakland piece worth reading and discussion. Frank Ogawa Plaza is only three blocks from my front door, so it was easy to visit the site, and I walk by it several times a week.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Wed 4th January 2012, 7:27am) *

Glad you all found the Occupy Oakland piece worth reading and discussion. Frank Ogawa Plaza is only three blocks from my front door, so it was easy to visit the site, and I walk by it several times a week.

Mike, are you enjoying your work at Mad River? How is it different from the work you did for the Wikimedia Foundation?

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 4th January 2012, 4:33am) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Wed 4th January 2012, 7:27am) *

Glad you all found the Occupy Oakland piece worth reading and discussion. Frank Ogawa Plaza is only three blocks from my front door, so it was easy to visit the site, and I walk by it several times a week.

Mike, are you enjoying your work at Mad River? How is it different from the work you did for the Wikimedia Foundation?


Yes, Mad River is great. The difference is mainly that with Mad River I've been able to work with the project almost from scratch. Wikimedia Foundation was in a different place in its growth curve when I came on board in 2007, and is in an even more different place now. (I have to caution you that obviously I'm barred by attorney-client privilege and other legal and ethical constraints from talking about any privileged or confidential matters regarding either Mad River or Wikimedia Foundation. I'm happy, however, to answer questions here about my coverage of the Occupy Oakland intervention.) I enjoyed just about everything in my work at Wikimedia Foundation, and my successor, Geoff Brigham, and I get along quite well.


Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Wed 4th January 2012, 12:20pm) *

...obviously I'm barred by attorney-client privilege and other legal and ethical constraints from talking about any privileged or confidential matters regarding either Mad River or Wikimedia Foundation.

Party pooper.

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 4th January 2012, 10:02am) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Wed 4th January 2012, 12:20pm) *

...obviously I'm barred by attorney-client privilege and other legal and ethical constraints from talking about any privileged or confidential matters regarding either Mad River or Wikimedia Foundation.

Party pooper.



I should add that I'm happy to talk about the nonprivileged aspects of the FBI matter (or non-privileged aspects of other issues I've worked on) as well. It's just that Eric Barbour opened this topic for the purpose of ridiculing me as a reporter, so it seems appropriate to reserve it for that topic. I wouldn't want to be the cause of topic drift.


Posted by: Vigilant

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 29th October 2011, 1:38pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 29th October 2011, 6:51am) *

Did you know that Mike Godwin occasionally writes for Reason, that famous libertarian rag?

Did you know that Mike http://reason.com/archives/2011/10/28/what-happened-at-occupy-oaklan?


I got into a huge fight with the idiot ... blah blah blah


Color us shocked.

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(Vigilant @ Wed 4th January 2012, 12:32pm) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 29th October 2011, 1:38pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 29th October 2011, 6:51am) *

Did you know that Mike Godwin occasionally writes for Reason, that famous libertarian rag?

Did you know that Mike http://reason.com/archives/2011/10/28/what-happened-at-occupy-oaklan?


I got into a huge fight with the idiot ... blah blah blah


Color us shocked.


Funnily enough, I don't remember Ottava's name at all. If Ottava is who I think it is, I think the was that, rather than believe my own eyes, I should instead believe Ottava's characterization of the protestors, even though Ottava apparently wasn't there, and even though Ottava read some police statements uncritically. It is routine for police to defend violent interventions by saying that someone attacked them. (It's almost a TV Trope!) I hope it is not news to anyone that most people -- even most protestors -- are disinclined to attack ranks of police in riot gear, armed with batons, stun guns, and automatics. There's plenty of video available regarding the Occupy Oakland intervention -- go watch a lot of it and make your own mind. No need to rely on my characterization of it, and certainly you should be cautious about accepting the characterizations of an event from someone who wasn't there.

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Wed 4th January 2012, 11:24am) *

I should add that I'm happy to talk about the nonprivileged aspects of the FBI matter (or non-privileged aspects of other issues I've worked on) as well. It's just that Eric Barbour opened this topic for the purpose of ridiculing me as a reporter, so it seems appropriate to reserve it for that topic. I wouldn't want to be the cause of topic drift.

If it helps: I posted that not because it's "bad reporting", it's actually good. Thing is, Mike, your stint
at the WMF has turned you into a lightning-rod for Wikipedia critics, and (sad to say) you've become
a slightly absurd figure because of it. You're now a "net-celebrity", partly because of the WMF and
partly because of your time at the EFF, and (of course) that "Godwin's Law" bit. Celebrities tend to
become targets of criticism, as you well know.

And as for Oakland: can't stand the place. I would not have bought real estate there, even if I had known
about the value explosion of the last 30 years, in advance. It's a nasty town. The treatment of the
Occupy people should underline that. I'd even call it the "Buffalo NY of the west coast", if there weren't
several equally-good candidates on the west coast. It's starting to develop the symptoms of a corrupt
former industrial city, even though it hasn't "died" yet, as Buffalo has. Complaints about the Oakland
police have become legion.

(Just btw: feel free to ignore Ottava. And again, if you'd like to learn things about Wikipedia that
no one has ever told you, PM me.)

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 4th January 2012, 2:32pm) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Wed 4th January 2012, 11:24am) *

I should add that I'm happy to talk about the nonprivileged aspects of the FBI matter (or non-privileged aspects of other issues I've worked on) as well. It's just that Eric Barbour opened this topic for the purpose of ridiculing me as a reporter, so it seems appropriate to reserve it for that topic. I wouldn't want to be the cause of topic drift.

If it helps: I posted that not because it's "bad reporting", it's actually good. Thing is, Mike, your stint
at the WMF has turned you into a lightning-rod for Wikipedia critics, and (sad to say) you've become
a slightly absurd figure because of it. You're now a "net-celebrity", partly because of the WMF and
partly because of your time at the EFF, and (of course) that "Godwin's Law" bit. Celebrities tend to
become targets of criticism, as you well know.

And as for Oakland: can't stand the place. I would not have bought real estate there, even if I had known
about the value explosion of the last 30 years, in advance. It's a nasty town. The treatment of the
Occupy people should underline that. I'd even call it the "Buffalo NY of the west coast", if there weren't
several equally-good candidates on the west coast. It's starting to develop the symptoms of a corrupt
former industrial city, even though it hasn't "died" yet, as Buffalo has. Complaints about the Oakland
police have become legion.

(Just btw: feel free to ignore Ottava. And again, if you'd like to learn things about Wikipedia that
no one has ever told you, PM me.)


I thought I was always slightly absurd. It disturbs me to think that I've only recently achieved slight absurdity. I think Google Analysis has hits on "Mike Godwin" peaking sometime in 2007 before I joined WMF. As for being a lightning rod for Wikipedia critics, certainly I've followed WR long enough to be
aware of how quickly that happens here.

I'm glad you thought the Occupy Oakland piece was good. I just figured you put scare quotes around "reporter" to raise questions about my journalistic cred. As it happens, I was a reporter years before I went to law school. These days, I publish stuff from time to time to keep my hand in.

I'm interested in anything you want to tell me in PM, Eric. Keep in mind, however, that there are legal/ethical limits on what I can share (although certainly I can talk about such things as what dealing with the FBI was like).

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 10:50am) *


I thought I was always slightly absurd. It disturbs me to think that I've only recently achieved slight absurdity. I think Google Analysis has hits on "Mike Godwin" peaking sometime in 2007 before I joined WMF. As for being a lightning rod for Wikipedia critics, certainly I've followed WR long enough to be
aware of how quickly that happens here.





Thank you for coming here and talking about your google analytics four years ago. Not often that poster put aside their narcissism. That is very very interesting.

Seems to me that a person who worked for a free speech organization being against beating up protester is kind of expected and not really much of an an occasion for At-A-Boys.

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 29th October 2011, 4:30am) *

The comments in response to Godwin's article are amusing, too. Reason apparently attracts a higher class of reader:

QUOTE

fish|10.28.11 @ 6:23PM|#

Rather you really need to develop some sort of social life. Anything.



Episiarch|10.28.11 @ 6:49PM|#

No, you're just retarded. Full retard.




rather |10.28.11 @ 6:48PM|#

I see you've been having fun with yourself again.

Honey, why don't you go back to masturbating and entertain both your little brains?




LOL|10.29.11 @ 1:19AM|#

Epi darling, tarran is confused. When I said I wanted to bang you on the head, I meant your drug addled brain, not your micropenis.

I see the confusion, same size, same IQ, and same leakage issue




Then again, there is this very insightful comment that must make Godwin, Reason, and libertarians squirm a bit:
QUOTE
"Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment...unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares?" ~Murray Rothbard

How is the OPD's aggression to defend property values in the city not in accordance with the wishes of the founder of Libertarianism, and dean of the Austrian school of Economics?



Since I'm neither a Libertarian nor an adherent of any Austrian school of economics, I'm untroubled by this question in the comments.

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 5th January 2012, 9:19am) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 10:50am) *


I thought I was always slightly absurd. It disturbs me to think that I've only recently achieved slight absurdity. I think Google Analysis has hits on "Mike Godwin" peaking sometime in 2007 before I joined WMF. As for being a lightning rod for Wikipedia critics, certainly I've followed WR long enough to be
aware of how quickly that happens here.





Thank you for coming here and talking about your google analytics four years ago. Not often that poster put aside their narcissism. That is very very interesting.

Seems to me that a person who worked for a free speech organization being against beating up protester is kind of expected and not really much of an an occasion for At-A-Boys.


Google Analytics put all of your Google hits over the last dozen years or so into one easy-to-read chart. I happened to clink on a link that someone posted on my Facebook Wall a few days ago, and it led directly to that Google Analytics chart. I don't use Google Analytics normally, but I noticed that the chart essentially flatlined right after I joined WMF and didn't spike again until a few months later.

Don't need At-A-Boys from you guys, and I would be more than slightly absurd if I expected them from you. Yes, being against beating up protestors is consistent with my long-held free-speech beliefs.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 12:36pm) *

Google Analytics put all of your Google hits over the last dozen years or so into one easy-to-read chart. I happened to clink on a link that someone posted on my Facebook Wall a few days ago, and it led directly to that Google Analytics chart. I don't use Google Analytics normally, but I noticed that the chart essentially flatlined right after I joined WMF and didn't spike again until a few months later.


Google Analytics is installed by site owners on particular websites. What exactly are you talking about? Which website were you tracking the "Google hits" upon? I'm curious if you're discussing some Google tool of which I'm not aware.

Are you maybe talking about http://www.google.com/trends?q=%22Mike+Godwin%22 or something?

By the way, I have Google Analytics installed on my "National Wiki Edits" Examiner.com articles that I publish occasionally. Ever since I installed the app in late October 2010 (several months after I began writing for Examiner), Google has registered about 37,000 page views of my articles. My article about http://www.examiner.com/wiki-edits-in-national/wikipedia-s-top-attorney-says-goodbye has accounted for 1.3% of the page views. Albeit, the Analytics tool was only installed a couple of days after that article was published. Of all of the 5,000+ searches that web users have performed, which resulted in their coming to Examiner.com to check it out, only 0.37% of the searches contained the word "Godwin".

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 5th January 2012, 10:19am) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 12:36pm) *

Google Analytics put all of your Google hits over the last dozen years or so into one easy-to-read chart. I happened to clink on a link that someone posted on my Facebook Wall a few days ago, and it led directly to that Google Analytics chart. I don't use Google Analytics normally, but I noticed that the chart essentially flatlined right after I joined WMF and didn't spike again until a few months later.


Google Analytics is installed by site owners on particular websites. What exactly are you talking about? Which website were you tracking the "Google hits" upon? I'm curious if you're discussing some Google tool of which I'm not aware.

Are you maybe talking about http://www.google.com/trends?q=%22Mike+Godwin%22 or something?


You're probably right that I'm misremembering the Google chart I came across as "Google Analytics". I can't remember which link it was now (which I suppose demonstrates that I don't normally follow that chart or any numbers generated by Google tools). Sorry for the mistake.

If I come across it again, I'll post the link here.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:28pm) *

If I come across it again, I'll post the link here.

Please do. Also, see that I appended my post just above, in case you're curious.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:41pm) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:28pm) *

If I come across it again, I'll post the link here.

Please do. Also, see that I appended my post just above, in case you're curious.


Let's do. Of course we are sitting on pins and needles for Kohs own results for whatever the same metric might be. I think we are making progress here.

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 5th January 2012, 11:10am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:41pm) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:28pm) *

If I come across it again, I'll post the link here.

Please do. Also, see that I appended my post just above, in case you're curious.


Let's do. Of course we are sitting on pins and needles for Kohs own results for whatever the same metric might be. I think we are making progress here.


I don't think it was a link to Google Trends. I just checked, and Google Trends has a brief spike relating to me at precisely the time the FBI story was widely publicized, but otherwise I'm pretty invisible in the last decade. Which, I think, makes perfect sense.

Posted by: Fusion

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 4th January 2012, 10:32pm) *

(of course) that "Godwin's Law" bit.

Oh yes I wanted to ask. Mr. Godwin, did you really invent that law all by yourself?

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 4th January 2012, 6:02pm) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Wed 4th January 2012, 12:20pm) *

...obviously I'm barred by attorney-client privilege and other legal and ethical constraints from talking about any privileged or confidential matters regarding either Mad River or Wikimedia Foundation.

Party pooper.

Sometimes the best answer for bad speech is no speech, Greg.

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:18pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 4th January 2012, 10:32pm) *

(of course) that "Godwin's Law" bit.

Oh yes I wanted to ask. Mr. Godwin, did you really invent that law all by yourself?


Yes, although my friend Richard Sexton claims he invented it independently. I wrote about this most recently here:

http://www.jewcy.com/arts-and-culture/i_seem_be_verb_18_years_godwins_law

And I was interviewed by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum here:

http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/antisemitism/voices/transcript/?content=20110901


Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 6:32pm) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:18pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 4th January 2012, 10:32pm) *

(of course) that "Godwin's Law" bit.

Oh yes I wanted to ask. Mr. Godwin, did you really invent that law all by yourself?


Yes, although my friend Richard Sexton claims he invented it independently. I wrote about this most recently here:

http://www.jewcy.com/arts-and-culture/i_seem_be_verb_18_years_godwins_law

And I was interviewed by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum here:

http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/antisemitism/voices/transcript/?content=20110901


Nobody else wants to take this one? Really? I mean I've seen a dozen Reviewers mock this conceit in the past. WR has become a bunch of fawning Wikipedians.

It is a "law" only in the sense that it intends to proscribe behavior of UseNet participants and the like. It is only "invented" in the sense of somebody might have said it. Not much to be proud of really.

Posted by: mnemonic

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 5th January 2012, 6:28pm) *

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 6:32pm) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Thu 5th January 2012, 1:18pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 4th January 2012, 10:32pm) *

(of course) that "Godwin's Law" bit.

Oh yes I wanted to ask. Mr. Godwin, did you really invent that law all by yourself?


Yes, although my friend Richard Sexton claims he invented it independently. I wrote about this most recently here:

http://www.jewcy.com/arts-and-culture/i_seem_be_verb_18_years_godwins_law

And I was interviewed by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum here:

http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/focus/antisemitism/voices/transcript/?content=20110901


Nobody else wants to take this one? Really? I mean I've seen a dozen Reviewers mock this conceit in the past. WR has become a bunch of fawning Wikipedians.

It is a "law" only in the sense that it intends to proscribe behavior of UseNet participants and the like. It is only "invented" in the sense of somebody might have said it. Not much to be proud of really.


That's an unusual interpretation of Godwin's Law -- nothing in my actual wording "proscribes" anything. And so far as I know, even the paraphrasing of Godwin's Law, quite common in media these days (e.g., Rachel Maddow has quoted it more than once), doesn't proscribe anything.

I used "invented" primarily because Fusion used that verb in his/her query.

As for "proud of" -- well, I don't know if "proud" is the right word. Basically, as I've written elsewhere, I was offended by glib hyperbolic use of Nazi and Hitler comparisons, so I designed an experiment to see if one person could change public discourse on the Internet. The fact that Godwin's Law migrated beyond the Internet to mainstream media was an unintended, unexpected result. I don't know that it makes sense to be "proud of" a result that one did not expect.

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(mnemonic @ Thu 5th January 2012, 8:41pm) *
That's an unusual interpretation of Godwin's Law -- nothing in my actual wording "proscribes" anything. And so far as I know, even the paraphrasing of Godwin's Law, quite common in media these days (e.g., Rachel Maddow has quoted it more than once), doesn't proscribe anything.

To be fair, he was referring to how the "law" is used now in online discussions, not how it was originally intended to be used, if it was even intended to be "used" in some fashion at all. I can't imagine you could have predicted the degree to which it's become part of the vernacular when you originally stated it...

The fact is, there really are people who probably should be compared to Hitler and the Nazis, in practical terms at least - the real problem is that "Hitler" and "Nazi" are such loaded words because of the Holocaust that you can't make those comparisons without essentially implying that the person being compared wants to kill millions of Jews. But there are plenty of fascists and fascistic ideas out there that should be exposed as being just that, and many of them have nothing at all to do with antisemitism.

Heck, I've probably offended a whole bunch of people just by saying all that just now, for which I humbly apologize.

Posted by: mnemonic

[quote name='Somey' date='Fri 6th January 2012, 8:47pm' post='292938']
[quote name='mnemonic' post='292745' date='Thu 5th January 2012, 8:41pm']

But there are plenty of fascists and fascistic ideas out there that should be exposed as being just that, and many of them have nothing at all to do with antisemitism.

[/quote]

I have made the same point myself, more than once.

I hid it in this column, for example:

http://www.jewcy.com/arts-and-culture/i_seem_be_verb_18_years_godwins_law