Is Wikipedia a cult? Options

[Elara]

I'd have to say that any group that engages in such blindness as this histronic sobbing farewell to a compulsive-lying jackass is clearly psychologically isolated from reality.

In such a mode of blindness to the differences between reality and wikiality, these people are certainly in a position to be in a cult. They have the mindset.

[Jonny Cache]

Evidence-finding isn't really the point here anyway, is it? The people we're trying to convince of this stuff are the kids, the people who show up thinking WP is some sort of really cool/mature/intellectual place, and who then get sucked into it, their time monopolized, their energies drained, their perspectives on the world distorted and skewed... sort of like what cults do, actually!...

Exactamundo. Some of us more foolhardy volunteers have already paid our dues in the mosquito-invested wikiputrid jungle swamps, and some of us more savvy ediots have already cached our $10 Amazonian gift certificates for letting the mosquitoes byte us under controlled experimental conditions.

But we're way past that stage of the game now. The nature of the disease that is spreading outward from that infestation of Slim-Jim meat(puppet)heads is already evident enough to those who have the gnosis to smell their stink.

It's time to start draining those swamps ...

After which — maybe we can get back to that information canal thing we came here for ...

Jonny

[Somey]

In such a mode of blindness to the differences between reality and wikiality, these people are certainly in a position to be in a cult. They have the mindset.

Well now, this is a good point that's often overlooked, actually. When you think of real, honest-to-goodness cults, these things often start out with nothing more than a huckster, an idea, and a general mindset. Then they start developing things like supporting ideologies, rituals, retention strategies, ad nauseum, but these things take time - and Wikipedia has only been around for 5-6 years. That's certainly enough time to get started, but there's still a ways to go yet.

Wikipedia-as-cult won't really start taking off until the teenagers who helped grow it into a monster start getting married to other Wikipedians, having kids of their own, and then indoctrinating those kids into the Wikipedia Way. Cults don't get really scary until you start having to deal with people who have literally been raised to believe nothing else, at least with respect to the motivating central idea.

How soon before we start seeing kids like that, then? Five years? Ten? By then, the various legal and cultural questions will presumably have been resolved, right? Probably not entirely in their favor, but if it's enough to keep them in business, it may not matter by then.

[Jonny Cache]

Let us pray they spend too much time on Recent Edit Patrol to have sex ...

Or wait — Maybe we could sell them on the Heaven's Gate Way ...

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Wed 28th March 2007, 6:15pm

[Jonny Cache]

In such a mode of blindness to the differences between reality and wikiality, these people are certainly in a position to be in a cult. They have the mindset.

Well now, this is a good point that's often overlooked, actually. When you think of real, honest-to-goodness cults, these things often start out with nothing more than a huckster, an idea, and a general mindset. Then they start developing things like supporting ideologies, rituals, retention strategies, ad nauseum but these things take time — and Wikipedia has only been around for 5-6 years. That's certainly enough time to get started, but there's still a ways to go yet.

Wikipedia-as-cult won't really start taking off until the teenagers who helped grow it into a monster start getting married to other Wikipedians, having kids of their own, and then indoctrinating those kids into the Wikipedia Way. Cults don't get really scary until you start having to deal with people who have literally been raised to believe nothing else, at least with respect to the motivating central idea.

How soon before we start seeing kids like that, then? Five years? Ten? By then, the various legal and cultural questions will presumably have been resolved, right? Probably not entirely in their favor, but if it's enough to keep them in business, it may not matter by then.

I dunno, Somey, I frequently suspect that people like Dan Tobias, who displays all the worldly wisdom of a 6-year old, may indeed already be members of the 2nd d-generation.

Jonny

[Cedric]

Evidence-finding isn't really the point here anyway, is it? The people we're trying to convince of this stuff are the kids, the people who show up thinking WP is some sort of really cool/mature/intellectual place, and who then get sucked into it, their time monopolized, their energies drained, their perspectives on the world distorted and skewed... sort of like what cults do, actually! They don't care about evidence, they care about what their friends tell them. And who are their friends? Well, us, of course!

But there was one incident, a couple years ago... and I just now remembered where it is. They'll probably delete it completely now that I'm linking to it here, but all the same, it's rather hard to "show a shred of evidence" when the evidence in question is buried in old diffs on user subpages!

Somey is right--it's mostly about the kids. So, for the kids I say:
WICKIPEDIA IS A CULT!
Carry on . . . .

[dtobias]

I dunno, Somey, I frequently suspect that people like Dan Tobias, who displays all the worldly wisdom of a 6-year old, may indeed already be members of the 2nd d-generation.

Is this a personal attack board? Because, if so, then I could try to start making them too myself, just to "do as the Romans do".

[Jonny Cache]

I dunno, Somey, I frequently suspect that people like Dan Tobias, who displays all the worldly wisdom of a 6-year old, may indeed already be members of the 2nd d-generation.

Is this a personal attack board? Because, if so, then I could try to start making them too myself, just to "do as the Romans do".

Oh, Danny, y'know we're just goofin' around ...

Becydes, who has asked for it, if ~ u ???

Jonny

[Somey]

Is this a personal attack board? Because, if so, then I could try to start making them too myself, just to "do as the Romans do".

Well, you started it!

I mean, let me be perfectly frank here. You've got a fair amount of guts for participating in this forum, and I respect that. I mean that sincerely! What's more, I think Jon was actually complimenting you, since I happen to know that he believes most Wikipedians have the worldly wisdom of three-year olds, so presumably you have twice as much as them - depending on how you calculate it. (That, maybe, not so sincere... but anyway...)

The fact is, if you don't want us to "attack" you with this kind of name-calling, then you've got to avoid it yourself, and that means everywhere. Otherwise, it's just gonna happen. I can't imagine you want me to censor these people... do you? You, of all people? Why, I could hardly imagine.

But if that's true, then I'll make you a deal: If you can manage to publicly support a reasonable opt-out policy, based on, let's say, the no-first-biography/only-by-signed-request principle - which is probably the most reasonable one from WP's perspective that could still be considered acceptable by a civilized society - I can make you disappear from Wikipedia Review completely, remove all traces of your ever having joined, posted, or anything. You can forget this all ever happened... Like a bad dream, from which you wake up, and everything's perfectly fine again, and you're surrounded by really hot babes wearing, like, practically nothing whatsoever!

Whaddya say, Dan?