Jimbo on Jimbo Options

[thekohser]

Jimbo is spending quite a bit of time going toe-to-toe with Seth Finkelstein.

Per usual, Jimmy loses in an embarrassing mismatch of wits.

Also, it would seem that Jimbo can't help himself but to undermine the Wikimedia Foundation's Section 230 protections:

I've always been intensively involved in the day-to-day operation of the encyclopedia.
-- Jimmy Wales

[EricBarbour]

Also, it would seem that Jimbo can't help himself but to undermine the Wikimedia Foundation's Section 230 protections:

I've always been intensively involved in the day-to-day operation of the encyclopedia.
-- Jimmy Wales

Don't tell us---tell Seth. He seems to enjoy poking the Little King-Boy, so let him bring up Section 230
on this talk page (not on Jimbo's user talkpage, where too many toads will see it and want to delete it).

[Moulton]

It is not appropriate for Wikipedia to editoralize on behalf of Seth or anyone else and portray me as holding opinions which I do not.--Jimbo Wales

I agree 100% with the sentiment that it is inappropriate for Wikipedians to publish false theories of mind. In my experience, some of most egregious abuses arise when other editors publish (and act upon) such false theories of mind.

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

Don't tell us---tell Seth. He seems to enjoy poking the Little King-Boy, so let him bring up Section 230
on this talk page (not on Jimbo's user talkpage, where too many toads will see it and want to delete it).

I don't know ... is there any evidence to suggest that anyone individual IS ABLE to tell their own lifestory objectively?

Has Jimbo been on the couch? If no so, is it not time enough for him to consider it?

(I'd recommend to him 2 to 3 sessions a week to begin with).

Mostly I bow to your wisdom Moulton, and recognise that you may be using this threat to go off at a tangent, but what evidence is there to suggest Jimbo's version of his own life is any more objective than anyone else's?

Given his position as an exalted guru (and a masterless one at that), and in full expectation of a hagiography any moment now, could we really expect him to look at, accept and discussion in public his shadow?

And excuse my ignorance in this area ... but has he written/published his autobiography yet?

Cheesey to do ... yes, probably, but if he wrapped it up with some business savvy and a few new age homiles and it'd sell.

[Moulton]

Objectivity vs. Subjectivity

Don't tell us---tell Seth. He seems to enjoy poking the Little King-Boy, so let him bring up Section 230 on this talk page (not on Jimbo's user talkpage, where too many toads will see it and want to delete it).

I don't know ... is there any evidence to suggest that anyone individual IS ABLE to tell their own lifestory objectively?

The problem isn't so much telling it objectively, but telling it in an entertaining manner without waxing tedious.

Has Jimbo been on the couch?

Yes, but not that couch. See ValleyWag for the salacious details.

Mostly I bow to your wisdom Moulton, and recognise that you may be using this threat thread to go off at a tangent, but what evidence is there to suggest Jimbo's version of his own life is any more objective than anyone else's?

Jimbo lives in a fishbowl, kind of like Truman Burbank, but without the self-awareness. The discrepancies between Jimbo's own version and what the Jimbo Watchers see makes for an objective study in subjectivity.

Not even Ayn Rand could tell her own story objectively.

And in any event, if a person could glean the insights buried in the tangle of their own lifestory, becoming aware of those insights would almost surely change the direction of the story.

Consider, for example, how Sam Vaknin changed, once he diagnosed and acknowledged his own narcisism.