I think I'm over it.

General discussion about Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects
User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Posts: 285
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by The Devil's Advocate » Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:08 pm

Kingsindian wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:07 am
Thanks for the response.

My main problem was that I did not find any overarching "point" for the piece. My main focus was supposed to be David Auerbach's saga on Wikipedia, but his case is very complicated and does not really lead to any simple conclusions. I read a lot of Auerbach's stuff for writing about the piece. For instance, Auerbach in his Slate article on GGTF essentially says the same thing as Gamaliel, but later on, there is a lot of bad blood between them. Auerbach, in his Slate review of Catherine (video game), even sounds very much like Anita Sarkeesian, decrying the "misogynist gaming culture". Therefore, Gamergate, and what happened with Auerbach and Wikipedia afterwards was very weird.

Therefore, I tried to put Auerbach (and related events) story in a broader context and show how Wikipedia's structure leads to these issue. The last section "structural issues" talks about this. There is supposed to be a part 2 (maybe more), if I get the time.

Perhaps what I wrote was as "boring and useless as possible", perhaps not. In general, I think the post could have been shorter.
I don't think it is all that complicated with Auerbach. He was anti-GamerGate, but a moderate who didn't think everyone on the opposing side were a maniacal conspiracy of rape terrorists. We all know how extremists feel about moderates. That you find it weird is, I suppose, revealing in its own way. One thing I reiterated regarding GamerGate is that it was very much, arguably still is, a fight primarily within the left rather than between the left and right. More accurately, it was a fight between the libertarian elements of the left and the authoritarian elements. Auerbach himself did a pretty good job summarizing the split in his piece about how to end GamerGate.
sashi wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:33 pm
I happened to look at wikipediocracy.com's Alexa rank the other day (I had the syntax up in my browser checking out flickr's continuing decline). There seems to have been a steep drop-off since summer. This struck me as odd, because I had the idea that the place had picked up slightly around the ArbCom election. Greg's unexplained retirement, the arrival of Crow's Nest, the IAC destruction of the alternatives to WPO, all led me to believe change was in the air. I was apparently wrong. Still. Uncle Trypto seems to think the story of ArbCom considering naming their annual cases for the Seven Dwarfs is worthy of satire.

Also, Auggie, thanks for an interesting thread title. I may use this expression to try and suss out the difference between "over"hood and "above"ness with some of my long-suffering ESL learners. ^^
This is more of a side point, but I got very little engagement on the Medium post about my ban from the WO post by Kingsindian. I received seven total referrals from the post directly. Maybe this is a matter of it being linked in the blog post and being summarized a bit in the blog post itself, but it still speaks to a limited audience. For comparison's sake, Vox Day recently posted about one of my other Medium posts and provided a three-paragraph excerpt yet I still got over 600 views off of it. Pretty sure I got more referrals for my ban piece from this link on a user page then from WO (to be fair the user was mentioned in a Breitbart piece of mine so it could have been boosted a bit by that).

User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by EarlStatler » Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:49 am

Great video TDA about extremism. Tell me, I am wondering, what do you think of our Dutch liberal-socialistic system? It is what we call Het Poldermodel. (Only Other uses, no idea were the rest of the article is about) and I wrote a few thinks about it here.
I should like your opinion about it as a American.

(PS, get a impression, because other use is old stuff from years ago and noncens, the complete article is one piece of bull.)
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Posts: 285
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:50 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by The Devil's Advocate » Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:14 am

EarlStatler wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:49 am
Great video TDA about extremism. Tell me, I am wondering, what do you think of our Dutch liberal-socialistic system? It is what we call Het Poldermodel. (Only Other uses, no idea were the rest of the article is about) and I wrote a few thinks about it here.
I should like your opinion about it as a American.

(PS, get a impression, because other use is old stuff from years ago and noncens, the complete article is one piece of bull.)
Well, I'm not keen on doing a deep dive on that, but the overview there seems a might bit better than others. I tend to think most decisions should be made cautiously and after evaluating as much of the relevant facts as possible. This goes even more so for government.

Kingsindian
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:15 am

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by Kingsindian » Mon Jan 22, 2018 5:53 am

The Devil's Advocate wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:08 pm
Kingsindian wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:07 am
Thanks for the response.

My main problem was that I did not find any overarching "point" for the piece. My main focus was supposed to be David Auerbach's saga on Wikipedia, but his case is very complicated and does not really lead to any simple conclusions. I read a lot of Auerbach's stuff for writing about the piece. For instance, Auerbach in his Slate article on GGTF essentially says the same thing as Gamaliel, but later on, there is a lot of bad blood between them. Auerbach, in his Slate review of Catherine (video game), even sounds very much like Anita Sarkeesian, decrying the "misogynist gaming culture". Therefore, Gamergate, and what happened with Auerbach and Wikipedia afterwards was very weird.

Therefore, I tried to put Auerbach (and related events) story in a broader context and show how Wikipedia's structure leads to these issue. The last section "structural issues" talks about this. There is supposed to be a part 2 (maybe more), if I get the time.

Perhaps what I wrote was as "boring and useless as possible", perhaps not. In general, I think the post could have been shorter.
I don't think it is all that complicated with Auerbach. He was anti-GamerGate, but a moderate who didn't think everyone on the opposing side were a maniacal conspiracy of rape terrorists. We all know how extremists feel about moderates. That you find it weird is, I suppose, revealing in its own way. One thing I reiterated regarding GamerGate is that it was very much, arguably still is, a fight primarily within the left rather than between the left and right. More accurately, it was a fight between the libertarian elements of the left and the authoritarian elements. Auerbach himself did a pretty good job summarizing the split in his piece about how to end GamerGate.
"Extremist" is an epithet rather than an analytical term. Why did Auerbach go from quoting Brianna Wu to fighting with her? And why did Auerbach fight with Gamaliel after basically echoing his arguments? It's also very convenient to believe that the split is between "libertarian" and "authoritarian" elements of the left. But to my mind, it's just begging the question, and is a rather self-serving explanation. I am therefore, suspicious of it.

Indeed, Auerbach makes some very weird points. Let me take a very simple example. Auerbach condemned Eric Corbett during and after the Gender Gap Task Force case and called Wikipedia sexist. So far, so Gamaliel. Now, recall that Yngvadottir supported Eric Corbett and lost her bit in that case when she overturned an AE decision unilaterally. Later, when Auerbach had a fight with Gamaliel, he stated that Wikipedia is sexist because Yngvadottir was desysopped but Gamaliel wasn't (in the April Fools ArbCom case). I do not find this a coherent argument. And it has little to do with being an "extremist" or "libertarian" or whatever.

In general, I find that many political fights are over personalities; and ideology is often a retrospective justifications. This is how sectarian splits work. Were Bolsheviks authoritarian while Mensheviks weren't? Actually, they both were. Was the Ayn Rand society "Objectivist" while the Atlas society wasn't?

However, saying that the entire matter boils down to personalities is too simple as well. There are definitely political differences. Rosa Luxemburg was still a Marxist, but her philosophy and actions were different from Lenin.

As for Gamergate in general, it had many different strands, and I do not consider it to be primarily an intra-left fight, especially after the entry of figures like Milo Yiannopoulos and Christina Hoff Sommers. Indeed, many of the themes go far back to complaints about political correctness on college campuses from the 1990s at least. This was mostly carried out by the right wing (indeed, Peter Thiel wrote a book called "The Diversity Myth") There are left-wing versions of the similar arguments, but they're framed in radically different forms and reach very different conclusions. When I read comments on KotakuInAction, I don't read those arguments, however.

The terms are rather vague anyway: anyone can claim to be leftist, rightist, feminist, libertarian, whatever. It's not what you say, but what you do. And what the framework of discussion is, what measures one is pushing, what coalitions one is part of. Politics is coalition-building to a large extent.

Kingsindian
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:15 am

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by Kingsindian » Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:32 am

Sorry, previous post was too long, so I'm splitting it up.

About the engagement point: one of course wants what one writes to be read (otherwise one can just write in a diary for oneself). But my goal was not to drive traffic to articles linked in my piece. Maybe you have a different interest than me (which is fine): you want more people to know about your case. Sure, but that's not what I was writing about.

In general, Vox Day's blog post was basically a link and a quote, and his website gets way more traffic than WO. Your post also aligns nicely with Vox Day's thoughts, about the actions of Wikipedia's "SJWs", so he provides a link to it. Fine, but again, that's not what I was writing about.

User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by EarlStatler » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:36 am

"Rosa Luxemburg was still a Marxist, but her philosophy and actions were different from Lenin."

Correct. If I say I am a marxist, it doesn't mean I support the vision of Lenin, Stalin or Mao Zedong. Or from Rosa Luxemburg. It's the base of the ideals I support. But that doesn't mean a liberal can't support the same ideals! Only the way he want to reach it is different, and I have t admit, sometimes better. Because there is a lot of leftish bull too.

It is rediciles to suggest TDA is against woman rights, pro sexual woman abuse, against good health care and good education because he is a liberal. Or a lier because he is a liberal. And that makes the so called Wiki left bias so extreem dangerous. Because it ends up in extremism.
The best example is that insane gender crap approach. Make women to a-sexual creature, who only can bitch to man, and we get a better Wikipedia.
It is in one word insane, and the most sad is, it helps neither women, nor men, nor the society, nor Wikipedia. And the first conclusion make it all so fucking depressing, even more than it already was.
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

User avatar
Auggie
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:00 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by Auggie » Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:38 pm

The Devil's Advocate wrote:
Sat Jan 20, 2018 7:27 am
Kingsindian seems to have a knack for finding a potentially interesting story and then writing something about it that is as boring and useless as possible. Readers should care about what he is discussing, but they don't because he doesn't sell them on why they should care. One could attribute this to his reluctance to condemn Wikipedia or its current state. He is, after all, still happily using Wikipedia and touting its worth. Yet that isn't entirely an excuse as plenty of people, including myself, were able to call out the site's faults more forcefully even as we talked about its good points.
It's entirely possible the problem is mine. I just seem to have less patience for this stuff lately. Gamergate, Encyclopedia Dramatica, I just don't care. We all know trolls are out there. Why should we pay attention to them?
The Joy wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:53 am
Well, the original target audience for WPO was mainly meant to be journalists and academics. Somehow, we just can't get the common person interested in Wikipedia's shenanigans unless it involves a sex scandal, a major criminal angle, or a stupendous financial blunder (and it has be VERY stupendous). Otherwise, most journalists and the public don't care. At least John Lawrence Seigenthaler and Daniel Brandt made a difference on Wikipedia, though not enough to truly stop the libel and privacy violations.
It could be I'm regressing back to "common person". WPO has been so boring so long, I've been failing to keep up. Wikipedia itself is only fun if you're playing the game.
sashi wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:33 pm
I happened to look at wikipediocracy.com's Alexa rank the other day (I had the syntax up in my browser checking out flickr's continuing decline). There seems to have been a steep drop-off since summer. This struck me as odd, because I had the idea that the place had picked up slightly around the ArbCom election. Greg's unexplained retirement, the arrival of Crow's Nest, the IAC destruction of the alternatives to WPO, all led me to believe change was in the air. I was apparently wrong. Still. Uncle Trypto seems to think the story of ArbCom considering naming their annual cases for the Seven Dwarfs is worthy of satire.

Also, Auggie, thanks for an interesting thread title. I may use this expression to try and suss out the difference between "over"hood and "above"ness with some of my long-suffering ESL learners. ^^
:lol: yes cool expression. I didn't even know Greg retired. What's that about?
Kingsindian wrote:
Sun Jan 21, 2018 7:07 am
Thanks for the response.

My main problem was that I did not find any overarching "point" for the piece. My main focus was supposed to be David Auerbach's saga on Wikipedia, but his case is very complicated and does not really lead to any simple conclusions. I read a lot of Auerbach's stuff for writing about the piece. For instance, Auerbach in his Slate article on GGTF essentially says the same thing as Gamaliel, but later on, there is a lot of bad blood between them. Auerbach, in his Slate review of Catherine (video game), even sounds very much like Anita Sarkeesian, decrying the "misogynist gaming culture". Therefore, Gamergate, and what happened with Auerbach and Wikipedia afterwards was very weird.

Therefore, I tried to put Auerbach (and related events) story in a broader context and show how Wikipedia's structure leads to these issue. The last section "structural issues" talks about this. There is supposed to be a part 2 (maybe more), if I get the time.

Perhaps what I wrote was as "boring and useless as possible", perhaps not. In general, I think the post could have been shorter.
Thanks for dropping in, and sorry if I was rough on you. Honestly I still have no idea who Auerbach is or what he did, and I skimmed the article. If you write part 2, the first paragraph needs to digest it down to complete idiot level, because that's where I'm at lately.

User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by EarlStatler » Mon Jan 22, 2018 7:50 pm

The Devil's Advocate wrote:
Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:14 am
Well, I'm not keen on doing a deep dive on that, but the overview there seems a might bit better than others. I tend to think most decisions should be made cautiously and after evaluating as much of the relevant facts as possible. This goes even more so for government.
If I was a American, I would be a conservative democrate, because I consider most left Americans as unrealistic lunatics. European left is compete different because we have a consensus politic whit coalitions between more political party's. At the moment we have four party's, and that keeps everything in balance. But in a two party system with Marxists who have the full power? No, never!
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

User avatar
Auggie
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:00 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by Auggie » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:26 pm

Conservative Democrats are an endangered species. That's part of the reason Democrats have been losing elections lately, and why they did so poorly in the upper Midwest where they were previously strong.

User avatar
EarlStatler
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: I think I'm over it.

Post by EarlStatler » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:54 pm

Making political choices seem me very hard in America, aggie. In Holland we have 14 about the same party's in our two Houses of Representatives. The PPV of Wilders is anti Islam, but has about the same social agenda as the left SP. And so it's al a mixture of marxism, christian, what is a kind of marxism with a god, a liberal party what shout be in America a kind of communists, and a cozy parlement. If you look here, the farewell to Roemer, SP, a marxist, you see the chairwoman is wearing a red dress. She is from Morocco, but grown up here. They have a good barbecue at the end of the year, and most parliamentarians know each other very well or are personal friends. Ah, it's a small hippie country, make peace , no war. You know that, you have been here. Is there a problem? Lets solve it together. Do you have a problem, we help you. That makes it so ridiculous WMF want to solve all kinds of not existing problems with more than 300.000 euro. 300.000 euro, be serious, to solve not exiting problems, how do you think that ends up?
Last edited by EarlStatler on Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you're in a dogfight, become a cat!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest