Wikipedia: A Threat To Civil Society, No More Monsieur Nice Guy Options Rating

[Jonny Cache]

No More Monsieur Nice Guy

After all this time, I get the feeling that many people, even many denizens of The Wikipedia Review, fail to comprehend the magnitude of the threat to Civil Society that is posed by Wikipedia and its ways.

And every time I get a glimmer of hope that Wikipedians themselves might just get their ways back on the path to recovery of humane good sense � well, they never fail to dash those hopes back into the mud of what they seem bound and determined to remain.

In order that some of you who know me best will understand the change in tactics that I must now undertake, I will try to lay out as clearly as I can why I think that Wikipedia and its ways pose the kind of danger to society that all people of good will must eventually oppose.

Jon Awbrey


This post has been edited by Jonny Cache:

[Kato]

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/nakedlunch2.jpg)

"The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer,
he sells the consumer to his product.
He does not improve and simplify his merchandise.
He degrades and simplifies the client."

William S. Burroughs. Naked Lunch.

[Jonny Cache]

(IMG:http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb311/Kato90125/nakedlunch2.jpg)

"The junk merchant doesn't sell his product to the consumer,
he sells the consumer to his product.
He does not improve and simplify his merchandise.
He degrades and simplifies the client."

� William S. Burroughs, Naked Lunch

There is a discussion in the so-called "Tar Pit and Feather Barrel" of The Wikipedia Review that touches � off and on, hot and cold � on the Matter of Evil, a thing or two about which I have a thing or three to say, but I can hardly tell the Tarry-Eyed from the Feather Heads in that subversion, er, subforum, so I will leave those animadversions where they lie and resurrect the issue here, in one of the more general contexts where it fits.

Jon Awbrey

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache:

[Jonny Cache]

There is a discussion in the so-called "Tar Pit and Feather Barrel" of The Wikipedia Review that touches � off and on, hot and cold � on the Matter of Evil, a thing or two about which I have a thing or three to say, but I can hardly tell the Tarry-Eyed from the Feather Heads in that subversion, er, subforum, so I will leave those animadversions where they lie and resurrect the issue here, in one of the more general contexts where it fits.

Jon Awbrey

There is a maxim that cautions against attributing to evil that which can be exlained by ignorance. Or some say stupidity, but 6 one way, ½ a wit the other, it's all the same to me. It is a good maxim, variously attributed in modern times, but the gist of it harks back as far as Plato's Socrates, at least.

None of that means that there are not evils in this world. There are actions that most of us do not hesitate to call evil. At barely one remove from the world's active evils there are the systems of belief that excuse and foster the growth of these evils.

For the record, I have to say that I place Wikipedia and its Pushers in both of these classes.

Jon Awbrey