Comment Re:The key bit (Score 1) 542
No, if Iran sides with the US in stomping out ISIS, they are definitely not choosing the lesser evil...
No, if Iran sides with the US in stomping out ISIS, they are definitely not choosing the lesser evil...
No, just lying in bed, working from home at my highly paid job, wondering when it was that slashdot got so lame. Used to be people came back with facts. Or counter arguments. Or opinions of their own. Or experiences of their own.
But it's been reduced to the point where the only opposition I ever get to my statements is from idiots who try to paint me as something I'm not and attack that. It's sad. You're sad.
I'm everything I ever said that I was. My life is stranger than fiction most of the time anyway, I have no need to lie to get people excited.
I agree... there should be a color for this. In between "Free" and "Partly free"; there should be a "Technically Free but de-facto censored" category
Why are you so afraid to call a spade a spade? The USA is NOT a free country. They censor people, they incarcerate more of their population than any other country, they make debt slaves of the people that remain... they are NOT FREE, and they're using war to spread their NOT FREEDOM everywhere they can because they hate OUR freedom.
Your ad hominem attack is irrelevant to the topic at hand. It's also flat out wrong; I've traveled to numerous different countries, and spent several years living outside my home country.
You talk about infrastructure like it's the be-all-and-end-all of everything. It's not.
Takes some seriously Orwellian doublethink to pretend copyright enforcement isn't censorship. The idea that the USA is a bastion of freedom... wake me up when there's a study made by people who aren't batshit crazy.
Get her addicted to cigarettes and cocaine. And pull out her molars. That'll get the weight off.
Oregon paid Oracle about $240.3 million for a system that never worked, the suit said.... seeking $200 million in damages.
I don't know why the hell they went with Oracle.
I'd have taken the job for $201 million dollars.
-
No "fact checking" will ever be allowed on many subjects, such as "Auschwitz", where even total myths are allowed to remain as though they were "facts". References are only made to other myth-supporting documents to support the articles. Anything that fails to support the myth is deleted.
You will instantly and consistently get shut down on Wikipedia.
The reason for that is that you are a Truth Crusader. It doesn't matter if you are Right or Wrong. Wikipedia shuts down Truth Crusaders on EITHER sides of any issue by simply declaring that Wikipedia is not a place to debate, or resolve, matters of Truth. Wikipedia pages are not filled with "Truth", Wikipedia content accurately reflects the content of "Verifiable Reliable Sources". If "Reliable Sources" consistently state something which happens to be false then Wikipedia is going to ACCURATELY report that that is what Reliable Sources say.
(Some might comment on the contradiction of "Reliable Sources" which contain false information. The world is an imperfect place, and no one can expect perfection in anything. The definition of "Reliable Source" is a set of criteria that establish a broad class of sources as reasonably reliable in general, independent of the fallibility of any particular source on a particular thing. So yes, a Reliable Source can be wrong, and Wikipedia will accurately reflect that wrong information up until the point when other Reliable Sources correct that information.)
If you want to wage a Truth Crusade exposing the "myths about Auschwitz", then Wikipedia is not the place to do it. Wikipedia does not and will not lead on that subject, nor will it lead on any other subject. Wikipedia follows. Wikipedia follows Reliable Sources. If and when you convince Reliable Sources to expose myths about Auschwitz, Wikipedia will gladly update to accurately report what those Reliable Sources say.
-
Make credibility a visible metric assignable by the deletionists or anyone else. Articles don't need to be deleted for lack of credibility. It works the same here on SlashDot with scores. Give users the choice of seeing only highly-credible articles if they want.
That sounded like an interesting idea.... for about 30 seconds.
Then I realized that it wouldn't solve anything, it wouldn't improve anything. It would just make things worse. Much worse. People would just start waging war over credibility. When it comes to notability, simple, you dig up three reliable sources on a subject and BAM, YOU WIN! Fight over. Inviting fights over credibility would be a never ending flamefest disaster.
-
Fake violence, like two guys punching it out, clearing the air and getting on with no lasting harm and no festering resentment.
As opposed to real violence, involving weapons, maiming and death.
Punch out your neighbor. Maybe you'll end up friends afterwards.
How on earth does this make him a "scumbag" and why do you want his career to fail, exactly?
Ever heard of something called integrity? This man has none. He crafted a huge lie and operated under false pretenses. Who cares why he did it? He did it. Nothing he says or does can be trusted now. People who spread lies and misinformation like this JUSTIFY censorship.
Espionage is not science. There's this thing called the scientific method, look it up.
I hope this guys career ends it the toilet. It takes a real scumbag to carry off this kind of hoax.
He's right, though. Could be a form of epilepsy. Should get her checked by a real doctor.
We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan
