Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ General Discussion _ World's foremost WP & WMF critics
Posted by: thekohser
Note that there are two questions in this poll. One about critics of Wikipedia, and the other about critics of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Note that "foremost" could be described as the "most famous person" who criticizes Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation. Or, "foremost" could be described as the "most dedicated critic", regardless of fame. Or, it could easily be described as the "most effective or influential critic". How you choose is up to you.
The voting will remain open until the end of Sunday, April 3, 2001.
Posted by: It's the blimp, Frank
We're off to a bad start insofar as people are not citing their "other" selections in a post.
Posted by: Tarc
Hazelton? Lulz. That's like looking at a list of famous scientists and seeing "Billy, built s paper mache volcano for the 5th grade science fair" in between Newton and Einstein.
You might as well list Jaraxle and Willy, if the bar is set so low.
Posted by: thekohser
We're off to a bad start insofar as people are not citing their "other" selections in a post.
That's probably some statistician in London. It's an outlier... at least until his other accounts get a chance to sign in and vote. For obvious reasons, he can't cite who his "other" choice would be.
Posted by: powercorrupts
Isn't using the qualifier "best of this group" perhaps a little better than asking for the "World's foremost"? Surely that would be the only way most people can honestly vote, the world being a big place and not quite yet 100% internet/Wikipedia friendly, alas. Some links and tips would be useful at least, followed by the 'vote' at the end of the digestion period. We all know Gregory Kohs of course, but to vote for the bestest 'in the world' you have to have knowledge of the whole field surely.
Unfortunately I think many new people to WR could think this poll is tongue in cheek. (though regulars will know it is serious of course).
Posted by: thekohser
Isn't using the qualifier "best of this group" perhaps a little better than asking for the "World's foremost"? Surely that would be the only way most people can honestly vote, the world being a big place and not quite yet 100% internet/Wikipedia friendly, alas. Some links and tips would be useful at least, followed by the 'vote' at the end of the digestion period. We all know Gregory Kohs of course, but to vote for the bestest 'in the world' you have to have knowledge of the whole field surely.
Unfortunately I think many new people to WR could think this poll is tongue in cheek. (though regulars will know it is serious of course).
I disagree with just about every trifling comment you just made. Why do you need "links and tips"? The whole Internet is out there, waiting to answer any of the questions you might have about any of these leading critics. If you feel that a particularly strong candidate was left out of the mix, open your mouth. Man, you are annoying, Mike.
Posted by: Cock-up-over-conspiracy
Isn't there a category for the cockiest critic of the WP and Wikipedia Mother Fuckers?
That is what WMF stands for, init?
Posted by: thekohser
Only 14 people have voted? This site must be dying.
Posted by: DollyD
The voting will remain open until the end of Sunday, April 3, 2001.
Only 14 people have voted? This site must be dying.
It's over 30 people now. Maybe the others missed the cut off date for voting? Luckily, I have a handy time machine. (I voted for you)
Posted by: Detective
It's over 30 people now. Maybe the others missed the cut off date for voting? Luckily, I have a handy time machine. (I voted for you)
Everyone gets two votes so only half as many people have voted as you think.
The trouble with this poll is that few people here know about the extremely eminent people who have complained to the WMF and Jimbo personally, and who voice their complaints to their peers. By some criteria they are far foremore (sic) than anyone listed here, but as they have not gone onto the Internet with their views, they are 9as far as the average WR| punter knows) non-existent.
Nor is there any way to vote in one half and abstain in the other, as there was in the Dick of Distinction poll. Of course, HK is a dab hand at designing survey questionnaires.
Posted by: thekohser
he trouble with this poll is that few people here know about the extremely eminent people who have complained to the WMF and Jimbo personally, and who voice their complaints to their peers. By some criteria they are far foremore (sic) than anyone listed here.
Do tell, Detective! Or, are you just speculating? "Extremely eminent"? That sounds like maybe someone high up in government, like Dr. Charles Gutteridge or someone like that?
Posted by: Detective
Do tell, Detective! Or, are you just speculating? "Extremely eminent"? That sounds like maybe someone high up in government, like Dr. Charles Gutteridge or someone like that?
No, I'm not speculating. Nor am I stupid enough to betray my sources by revealing names.
Posted by: LessHorrid vanU
Only 14 people have voted? This site must be dying.
Or there are a lot of people studiously researching all available media and historical databases because someone - perhaps absentmindedly, if we are to be generous - required people to name the World's (is that a proper noun, and if so what constitutes "the World"?) foremost WP & WMF critics... It is a tall order. It may have been easier if the question was posed as, "who out of the following individuals, who have been referenced within these pages recently, do you believe are the foremost WP & WMF critic", but instead we must determine who is and note accordingly.
I can't be bothered, and am pretty certain that I am on ignore on a lot of peoples options, but I may have opined a vote for... Kelly; but only because it might wind her up (and I think she was rude to me, once, long ago, about something.) However, since it is not about simple belief and preference my opinion must remain unknown.
Posted by: DollyD
It's over 30 people now. Maybe the others missed the cut off date for voting? Luckily, I have a handy time machine. (I voted for you)
Everyone gets two votes so only half as many people have voted as you think.
Ah, yes. I see that now.
Posted by: Cock-up-over-conspiracy
There could have been a better turn out if the category was Cock of Distinction.
Posted by: Gruntled
We should of course have had a preliminary discussion where people could have suggested names. For example, Mr Kohs would doubtless have wished to draw attention to http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=33224&hl=, which clearly refers to a critic of major significance. Or don't German critics count?
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
We should of course have had a preliminary discussion where people could have suggested names. For example, Mr Kohs would doubtless have wished to draw attention to http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=33224&hl=, which clearly refers to a critic of major significance. Or don't German critics count?
Hey Mikey, shut the actual fuck up already.
Posted by: thekohser
We should of course have had a preliminary discussion where people could have suggested names.
Well, "we" did have a preliminary discussion, for a couple of days. Maybe you didn't see it.
Posted by: Doc glasgow
I notice Danny Wool was for some reason omitted from foremost critic of the WMF. Pity, I think he's have stopped the Gregory Kohs self-glorification train in its tracks.
Greg is one of the most persistent critics of the WMF, but unlike Wool, he's yet to land a punch. They actually had to put out press releases disputing Wool's allegations.
Posted by: Gruntled
We should of course have had a preliminary discussion where people could have suggested names.
Well, "we" did have a preliminary discussion, for a couple of days. Maybe you didn't see it.
I have no doubt that you, "Charlotte", Timothy and the rest of the Cabal had a secret converstion from which most people were excluded. I'm contrasting that with the way HK runs the "Dick of Distinction" vote, where people aren't excluded.
I notice Danny Wool was for some reason omitted from foremost critic of the WMF. Pity, I think he's have stopped the Gregory Kohs self-glorification train in its tracks.
Oh dear, Mike! No doubt Greg and "Charlotte" will swiftly tell you off for saying that and accuse you of being Lilburne or Zoloft.
Posted by: Zoloft
We should of course have had a preliminary discussion where people could have suggested names.
Well, "we" did have a preliminary discussion, for a couple of days. Maybe you didn't see it.
I have no doubt that you, "Charlotte", Timothy and the rest of the Cabal had a secret converstion from which most people were excluded. I'm contrasting that with the way HK runs the "Dick of Distinction" vote, where people aren't excluded.
I notice Danny Wool was for some reason omitted from foremost critic of the WMF. Pity, I think he's have stopped the Gregory Kohs self-glorification train in its tracks.
Oh dear, Mike! No doubt Greg and "Charlotte" will swiftly tell you off for saying that and accuse you of being Lilburne or Zoloft.
Try to keep up. I'm one of Greg's socks.
Posted by: Alison
I have no doubt that you, "Charlotte", Timothy and the rest of the Cabal ....
I got this far, then stopped
Posted by: lilburne
Outright attacks rarely land a killer blow on the subject. Effective opposition needs to be more subtle, such that by the time the subject notices and can respond they have already lost. Arguing on general purpose blogs and other online journals won't do much good.
One needs to target the minds of the Silver Serens of the world such that WP editing is no longer considered cool. Mostly it appears that that system is already doing that quite well on its own, but it won't harm to grease the tracks a little.
Kids seem to have a keen sense on fair, and I'm sure that the Black song thing could well be presented as being mean, cruel, not fair, and something that one really wouldn't want to be seen aiding, even if it is an article on the BESTEST GROUP EVAR.
Kids also seem to have a phenomenal communications network, this was first noticed when events in one part of the country could be traced in variations of children's rhyming and skipping games spreading across the country within days.
But the phenomena isn't limited to children, an old friend of mine was in Burma when the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan. He used to say that he was first made aware of the event by the local natives, no TV, no radio, no newspapers, simply word of mouth spreading across Asia of the mushroom clouds above Japan.
Posted by: thekohser
I notice Danny Wool was for some reason omitted from foremost critic of the WMF. Pity, I think he's have stopped the Gregory Kohs self-glorification train in its tracks.
Greg is one of the most persistent critics of the WMF, but unlike Wool, he's yet to land a punch. They actually had to put out press releases disputing Wool's allegations.
That's really weird, because I had Danny Wool on my hand-written list, and I could have sworn he was there on the electronic poll initially. Am I losing my mind? Did a moderator modify the poll candidates?
Edit: Is there a way to now include Danny Wool as a candidate? Danny and I have had friendly conversations by phone multiple times, and he introduced me to someone who is now a mutual friend. There's no way I would want to slight him in any way.
Posted by: Doc glasgow
I notice Danny Wool was for some reason omitted from foremost critic of the WMF. Pity, I think he's have stopped the Gregory Kohs self-glorification train in its tracks.
Greg is one of the most persistent critics of the WMF, but unlike Wool, he's yet to land a punch. They actually had to put out press releases disputing Wool's allegations.
That's really weird, because I had Danny Wool on my hand-written list, and I could have sworn he was there on the electronic poll initially. Am I losing my mind? Did a moderator modify the poll candidates?
Edit: Is there a way to now include Danny Wool as a candidate? Danny and I have had friendly conversations by phone multiple times, and he introduced me to someone who is now a mutual friend. There's no way I would want to slight him in any way.
I doubt Danny will be slighted. I doubt he will care. However, it may make the poll result a bit questionable. You can't add someone to a poll now, and even if you could it would invalidate all the votes cast. You've either got to decide it's just a bit of fun and never mind, or start again.
Posted by: thekohser
However, it may make the poll result a bit questionable. You can't add someone to a poll now, and even if you could it would invalidate all the votes cast. You've either got to decide it's just a bit of fun and never mind, or start again.
I agree, but I think the poll result was going to be "a bit questionable" regardless.
Posted by: EricBarbour
My worthless 2 cents: Colbert isn't a valid "critic" of WP, because he's a comedian,
and people don't necessarily take him seriously. He mocked WP admins and
Arbcommies for being basement dwellers, and pointed out the foolishness of
letting random mutants edit an "encyclopedia", but those are easy cheap shots.
He and the Daily Show are still occasionally having Wales The Questionable
on as a guest--and lobbing very soft balls at him. Jon Stewart, executive
producer of both shows, seems to like Jimbo.
Larry Sanger has been criticizing the WMF, recently. But not very much.
He hasn't made a multiyear campaign out of it. And I wish he would.
I would personally give the top ratings to Greg and to Daniel Brandt,
because they are dedicated, and because they are intensely hated by
WP's inner circle of toads--to an extent that almost no one else "enjoys".
Not sure about Danny Wool---he gave up on his blog more than a year ago,
and has pretty much dropped out of sight since then.
I'd rather see this poll started over, with a smaller list.
Posted by: Gruntled
I have no doubt that you, "Charlotte", Timothy and the rest of the Cabal ....
I got this far, then stopped
Apologies, Alison. "I have no doubt that you, "Charlotte", Timothy, his friend Alison and the rest of the Cabal ...."
I would personally give the top ratings to Greg and to Daniel Brandt,
because they are dedicated, and because they are intensely hated by
WP's inner circle of toads--to an extent that almost no one else "enjoys".
Oh, I hadn't realised that this was about who was hated most "by WP's inner circle of toads". That's an entirely different kettle of fish. We have enough members of the inner circle on WR; maybe they'd like to say who they hate most.
+1
Posted by: thekohser
If we consider this a "primary" vote, should we have a general election from the top 5 or so from each list? Should Danny Wool be added?
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
I'm not sure i understand the point of it all. Does the winner get a barnstar?
Posted by: thekohser
I'm not sure i understand the point of it all. Does the winner get a barnstar?
Speaking fees on a par with Jimbo, circa 2007.
Posted by: Daniel Brandt
I'm not sure i understand the point of it all. Does the winner get a barnstar?
The winner gets their name deleted.
Posted by: powercorrupts
I'm not sure i understand the point of it all. Does the winner get a barnstar?
Come on HK, haven't you always needed to know exactly who definitive critic of Wikimedia was? With disappointingly inconclusive stats like above, WP dissenters will never get the editorial leadership they need. Look at the winner: 32% in your own patch falls short of a barnstorm - but General elections tend to be about fewer candidates and first past the post.
Knock off all those untidy votes I say, and go for the big one!
Posted by: Milton Roe
I would personally give the top ratings to Greg and to Daniel Brandt,
because they are dedicated, and because they are intensely hated by
WP's inner circle of toads--to an extent that almost no one else "enjoys".
That was more or less my thinking. The more WMF hates them, the better they must be. Kohs deserves honorable mention and the silver medal, but Brandt and his Hivemind admin RL list has clearly hit them where they're tender. And done so in that ineffably-satisfying "scratch-where-it-itches" way that we recognize as "poetic justice": they have been punished by being forced to gag down a very large dose of their own medicine, hoist by their own petard, etc., etc., choose your own metaphor. Nobody has ever lobbed stones at WMF's glass house, quite like Brandt.
The amazing part of this, as I've said many times, is that WMF has learned NOTHING general from it (and the only specific thing they've learned is not to mess with Brandt). But even that fact says something about THEM. One cannot punish a person who does not recognize, by reason of total self-centeredness, that they've done anything wrong; the most you can do is hurt them.
But it sure feels good to the rest of us, to watch.
Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky
Kohs deserves honorable mention and the silver medal, but Brandt and his Hivemind admin RL list has clearly hit them where they're tender. And done so in that ineffably-satisfying "scratch-where-it-itches" way that we recognize as "poetic justice": they have been punished by being forced to gag down a very large dose of their own medicine, hoist by their own petard, etc., etc., choose your own metaphor. Nobody has ever lobbed stones at WMF's glass house, quite like Brandt.