Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Other options besides Wikipedia.
Proabivouac
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:01 pm

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by Proabivouac » Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:09 am

sashi wrote:
Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:44 pm
Zoloft recently returned to WPO and made a point of saying you weren't a member.
What was the context of this point of his?

The original link to the topic of the thread was TDA saying that many "social justice warriors" were full-blown communists, to which I replied, no, they are liberals and these are completely different ideas. This led to somewhat of an inquisition, though fortunately not including actual torture. Had the same discussion occurred on Wikipediocracy, where Zoloft is definitely a male member, the controversy would have been completely different as Wikipediocracy like Wikipedia is stridently liberal in outlook. Self-described "socialists" have slavishly carried liberals' water for decades now, so calling oneself a communist (I believe Carrite calls himself a Marxist) is viewed as harmless and wouldn't likely be cause for a purge, but dissent on the so-called "cultural issues" is vigorously suppressed.

This illustrates what I was saying to begin with, that in practice it's not economic equality which motivates them and in fact they oppose it, but there's no need for them to say so so long as "socialists" back them on the issues that they do care about without causing trouble. In the long run, the destruction of the family and hence community is a bigger gift to capitalism than one might have reasonably hoped for, since there is no organizing principle left standing besides money. Thus the world, in their view, is finally fair.

See, isn't this inspirational?

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/03/busi ... e-him.html

Gay, latino and tech, hooray! Especially funny how this makes a Goldman Sachs chief an honorary non-plutocrat. You get a sense of how this religion works and whom it serves.

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by The Devil's Advocate » Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:55 am

Proabivouac wrote:
Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:09 am
The original link to the topic of the thread was TDA saying that many "social justice warriors" were full-blown communists, to which I replied, no, they are liberals and these are completely different ideas.
On this much you are mistaken. There are definitely many who self-identify this way that are literal communists. It isn't all of them for sure, but enough of them. Said fact is a source of friction in these circles as the more traditionally progressive elements conflict with the more radical socialism-oriented elements.

Kingsindian
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:15 am

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by Kingsindian » Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:27 pm

The article is well-written. First, a related issue: The wikia site "sjw.wikia.com" was closed sometime around the end of July, so roughly in the same time period. You might want to check out why it was closed down.

Criticisms follow.

-----------------

I found the thesis rather dubious. What's the evidence that the spam filter had political motives? And even if the nefarious motives did exist, why is a spam filter that lasted for about a week of any significance?

A Google search for "social justice warrior" with site: wikia.com returns hundreds of hits. A one for "SJW" turns up thousands of hits. Here's a sample:

http://rotten-websites.wikia.com/wiki/S ... e_Warriors
by admin and bureaucrat http://rotten-websites.wikia.com/wiki/S ... ightingale

http://toxic-fandoms-and-hatedoms.wikia ... e_Warriors

http://truecapitalist.wikia.com/wiki/So ... ce_Warrior

http://social-justice-warrior.wikia.com/wiki/Man

The ones I checked almost always used "SJW" pejoratively. For instance, there is an entire "social justice warrior" wiki which makes fun of what it thinks an SJW is. For instance, the page "Man" contains nothing but a picture of Hitler. Also, their page on "White people", which also contains a picture of Hitler.

http://social-justice-warrior.wikia.com ... ite_people

Here's another one, a category of SJWs:

http://terrible-tv-shows.wikia.com/wiki/Category:SJWs
SJWs (short for social justice warriors) have become one of the biggest groups of killjoys and threats to entertainment, focusing on censoring things they don't like in shows or even getting a show cancelled on TV, forcing their ideology down our throats and hearts and saying that everything is racist, offensive, and sexist when they are racist and sexist themselves (as you can tell they prove how hypocritical they are)
-------------------------

It seems to me that the comment by Dysklyver above is closer to the mark: Wikia doesn't even have the capability to moderate any content. Almost any nonsense you write (which they can put ads on) is fine with them.

Spam filters often have political/censorship implications, intended or unintended. You might want to check out the old work of Seth Finkelstein (who also used to be a Wikipedia critic) -- he used to run a "Censorware project". Filters based on straight matches and regular expressions are known to be bad -- this is what Wikia seems to have used here. That's why Bayesian filters are usually used nowadays (in Gmail and elsewhere). Perhaps the Wikia technical people aren't especially bright, or maybe the MediaWiki software isn't sophisticated enough. Anyway, that's what it seems to me.

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by The Devil's Advocate » Fri Aug 10, 2018 11:27 pm

Kingsindian wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:27 pm
I found the thesis rather dubious. What's the evidence that the spam filter had political motives? And even if the nefarious motives did exist, why is a spam filter that lasted for about a week of any significance?
Seriously? What is with you? At this point your criticism is little more than concern-trolling. I think the political motive here is pretty self-evident. This was a staff decision and the staff have a pretty open political agenda in terms of the content they publish. Had you read the article in full then you would know that much. For significance I would cite the fact Wikia is one of the top twenty websites in the United States and top fifty in the world. Banning a politically sensitive phrase for any period of time on such a high traffic site and only removing it some days later due to word of it having unintended negative impact and causing false positives is a story.

Kingsindian
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:15 am

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by Kingsindian » Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:49 am

I never troll: that is, I never say anything which I don't believe just for the sake of provocation. If I'm joking or something (which I do very rarely, and which is usually pretty clear), you can ask me and I'll let you know.

I did read the piece; rather carefully, in fact. That's why I gave specific criticisms of it.

You actually didn't give evidence of political motives for the spam filter: you just made the argument that there are other cases of hamhanded content with political implications; therefore this case must be political as well. That's about as logical as saying that cops tend to be right-wing, therefore one particular action of theirs must have a right-wing political agenda.

The "significance" comment refers to the fact that there are hundreds/thousands of instances of "SJW" or "Social Justice Warrior" etc. on Wikia, almost all of them pejorative; so what exactly is the significance of a badly-implemented spam filter which was fixed in a week?

Finally, as I already said: you're not writing for me. If you think that it's a waste of time or that I'm trolling or whatever, feel free to not reply. I will keep calling it as I see it.

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by The Devil's Advocate » Sat Aug 11, 2018 4:38 pm

Kingsindian wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:49 am
I never troll: that is, I never say anything which I don't believe just for the sake of provocation. If I'm joking or something (which I do very rarely, and which is usually pretty clear), you can ask me and I'll let you know.
Pretty much all you ever do when you talk about one of my pieces is whine about how something isn't really about bias when bias is blatant or isn't really proven where the facts are self-evident.
You actually didn't give evidence of political motives for the spam filter: you just made the argument that there are other cases of hamhanded content with political implications; therefore this case must be political as well. That's about as logical as saying that cops tend to be right-wing, therefore one particular action of theirs must have a right-wing political agenda.
Banning the term "SJW" is inherently political. Do you think they don't know what the term means?

Kingsindian
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:15 am

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by Kingsindian » Sat Aug 11, 2018 10:50 pm

Here is what you get wrong about me: I do not have any particular interest in bias, like you seem to have. I have an interest in the truth. The truth about any large system is complicated, and can have many aspects. Some aspects of the truth are large and important, some small and trivial. I try to get a sense of which aspects are important and which are trivial. It's like the story of the blind men trying to find out what an elephant looks like.

When I read your piece, I looked at some simple things, to get a sense of the content on Wikia. A spam filter only blocks new additions to the wiki; so what kind of stuff was already existing? I looked for like 15 mins and found the state of affairs as described above. I concluded that the Wikia staff has basically no power over the content on their sites, and moreover, they don't care. What they care about is putting ads on their sites. The ideology isn't really important to them, nor is there much capability or willpower to do anything about it.

The fact that they used a regular expression/exact match filter told me that they're incompetent, lazy or both. These kinds of filters are known to be bad for several decades now, but they're still used because they're easy to implement. After the implementation of this filter, they got a bunch of complaints and so they removed the filter within a week.

Maybe you consider these aspects to be irrelevant to the story you want to tell. Fine. As I said, you're not writing for me. Breitbart's demand is for a certain type of story, you supply it; and that's the kind of story you are also interested in. But I'm not writing for Breitbart, and I'm not you; so I don't limit myself to the things you or Breitbart are interested in.

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by The Devil's Advocate » Sun Aug 12, 2018 4:53 am

Kingsindian wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 10:50 pm
Here is what you get wrong about me: I do not have any particular interest in bias, like you seem to have. I have an interest in the truth.
I think right there seems to be your problem. You fail to understand that "truth" and bias are a common interest as they are very much in opposition to each other. Having read your pieces at WO and your comments here, I am not convinced you are really interested in the truth. All you seem to do is ask questions and spread doubt. Conveniently, this attitude seems to be generally adopted by you in a manner that protects Wikipedia and protects the left. Reminds me of how certain people on the left try to argue that neutrality or objectivity are unachievable so you shouldn't really bother making either your focus and instead make it about finding "truth" in your work. It is odd because a lot of them also talk about how the dominant identity group unconsciously see itself as the default and yet fail to grasp they are doing the same with their ideology. Viewing actions on Wikipedia and Wikia through a non-partisan institutional lens sound reasonable, but for people such as yourself it is, in practice, just a way to dismiss claims of political bias because they are uncomfortable topics.

Proabivouac
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:01 pm

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by Proabivouac » Sun Aug 12, 2018 11:45 pm

The Devil's Advocate wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 4:53 am
Having read your pieces at WO and your comments here, I am not convinced you are really interested in the truth. All you seem to do is ask questions and spread doubt.
I don't know; this latest piece is a good read:

http://wikipediocracy.com/2018/08/08/wi ... imes-mean/

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: Wikia bans "SJW" term for a period and it goes poorly

Post by The Devil's Advocate » Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:57 am

Proabivouac wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 11:45 pm
I don't know; this latest piece is a good read:

http://wikipediocracy.com/2018/08/08/wi ... imes-mean/
I was literally thinking of that post. Lots of questions, lots of noncommital statements, and ultimately no real answers offered. So many problems in this piece, but the biggest one is the lack of any thesis or conclusion. Pretty much reads the way his criticism of what I write reads.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest