Mike Godwin, "reporter" Options

[EricBarbour]

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

Did you know that Mike visited the Occupy Oakland protest?

[thekohser]

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 known truism, "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.

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.

[thekohser]

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

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:

"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?

[Ottava]

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

Did you know that Mike visited the Occupy Oakland protest?

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.

[anthony]

Did you know that Mike visited the Occupy Oakland protest?

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

[anthony]

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-b...allstreet.html)

[Michaeldsuarez]

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-b...allstreet.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:

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_...civil_rights%29

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

This post has been edited by Michaeldsuarez:

[thekohser]

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

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

That may be because (according to one leading Wikipedia expert) blacks don't volunteer, and so they don't help Wikipedia, the world's greatest volunteer project.

[mbz1]

That may be because (according to one leading Wikipedia expert) 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?

This post has been edited by mbz1:

[thekohser]

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.

[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.

[thekohser]

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?

[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.

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.



This post has been edited by mnemonic:

[thekohser]

...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.

[mnemonic]

...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.

[Vigilant]

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

Did you know that Mike visited the Occupy Oakland protest?

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

Color us shocked.

[mnemonic]

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

Did you know that Mike visited the Occupy Oakland protest?

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.

This post has been edited by mnemonic:

[EricBarbour]

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.)

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[mnemonic]

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).

[GlassBeadGame]

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.