Wikipedism As Social Movement (WP:ASM), In A Halfway Sane World It'd Backfire, But … Options

[Jon Awbrey]

Sue Gardner's latest rallying cry that poses Wikipedism as a social movement — aside from the fact that it insults everyone from the Hippies of the Sixties and Martin Luther King, Jr. to the CIA, FBI, and the Quakers — doesn't it seem to you that an e-posture like that would be guaranteed to backfire, that is to say, if the world were the least bit sane anymore?

Jon

[tarantino]

Wikipedian \ˌwi-kē-ˈpē-dē-in\ – See Infornographer

[Somey]

...See Infornographer...

Eek, yet another article about a totally manufactured buzzword that never caught on despite having a Wikipedia article about itself which, in turn, never got deleted when it should have become clear that the word wasn't catching on.

Perhaps we should adopt this word as an epithet for Wikipedians and "Wikipedianism" - is that what you're suggesting here, Mr. Tarantino? It might work...

Anyway, I couldn't help thinking that some of what Sue Gardner's blog contains indicates a whole new marketing strategy for WP, emphasizing how "well-established" it is - it's a part of YOUR life! "Everybody likes it!" Imagine how desolate and depressing life would be without it! ...and so on.

And it's definitely not a "social movement" in any realistic sense of the term - I might even go so far as to say it's self-destructive to suggest such a thing.

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

She's completely deluded.

She's paid to be very good at being deluded and pump those memes and PR shots out.

Either she is genuinely dewy-eyed deluded and she was chosen by Guru Jimbo as his leading handmaiden specifically for that reason ... or she is smarter than we think - but as immoral as we suspect they are - and able to play it for the money.

I don't know which one it is.

I mean, some people are really good at lying, even lying to themselves, when big money or big status promotion is involved. And, let's remember folks, the Guru's handsome handmaidens are paid handsomely and pull in side benefits.

Eek, yet another article about a totally manufactured buzzword that never caught on despite having a Wikipedia article about itself which, in turn, never got deleted when it should have become clear that the word wasn't catching on.

Oh, wow. Right, we need ANOTHER buzzword just for that too even if an idiom would be easier. If you or Greg says it, I'll quote you and write a page on the Wikipedia.

"The Used Condoms of Infornography" ...? "Inforrhea" has already picked up a few references.

“Readers in this Wiki-culture will believe anything that isn’t too lengthy. A blog is so short and ill-informed that it doesn’t give the unfortunate, ailed recipient of inforrhea time to realize and digest the bullshit.

The basic problem, of course, is that the Internet lacks good centralized directories and subdirectories of available information through which to route search requests. Accordingly, the result of many information searches for data on the World Wide Web ends up as "inforrhea at your fingertips" rather than "information at your fingertips."