to decide what Wikipedia uses, they should
have known that, and Jed didn't really mind! An administrator, this
time, put it back.
It's possible to get things done on Wikipedia, but the cost is huge.
Probably not worth it, at least not worth it for anything other than
fairly disintere
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> In my experience, you can always distribute government documents of this
> nature.
And why not . . . we paid for it. :-)
Terry
Steven Krivit quoted the distribution letter that I also quoted:
OK folks,
The LENR paper (below) finally got released on Friday and should have
gone into the OSD (at least the AT&L) read books this morning. The paper is
unclassified so feel free to forward it to whomever you think would be
in
okay, so when they publish the read books, there is an actual printed
volume to go with it, yes? so get the name of it, if not simply OSD
Read Book, and the volume number. boom, proper citation.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Steven Krivit
wrote:
> At 06:47 AM 11/19/2009, you wrote:
>
> okay
At 07:21 AM 11/19/2009, you wrote:
Steven V Johnson wrote:
...but that does not answer the principal question: How does one
verify its pedigree?
For those of us (particularly me!) who may not be as quick witted as
you appear to be can you clarify how you went about verifying the
presumed legit
At 06:47 AM 11/19/2009, you wrote:
okay, WHERE was it published, is the big question.
This is a good question. Here is the answer: Beverly Barnhart distributed
it on Monday with the following note:
OK folks,
The LENR paper (below) finally got released on Friday and should have
gone into t
Jed sed:
> I guess you could ask the Agency but I expect your request would be
> lost in the shuffle.
and...
> I am sure of the pedigree because the authors sent me the document.
For which I sed:
> That's a good point. Thanks for revealing that little tidbit.
For which Jed sed:
> I said that
Mauro Lacy wrote:
And also raising the question of how to deal with government documents
which are unclassified, but not published on the internet. A good point to
be made in Wikipedia, I think, for this and future cases.
As far as I know, the ERAB report is not available on any government
Steven V Johnson wrote:
> Ask the authors, I guess.
You guess???
How else?
I guess you could ask the Agency but I expect your request would be
lost in the shuffle.
> I am sure of the pedigree because the authors sent me the document.
That's a good point. Thanks for revealing that littl
Thanks Jed for the clarification.
There's a new comment by V now on wikipedia, stating that
public(unclassified) documents are, erm, public. So, no take down is
legally enforceable.
And also raising the question of how to deal with government documents
which are unclassified, but not publish
Jed sez:
> (By the way, they said they can't provide it in Acrobat text format.
> A shame.)
Another fine example of our tax dollars working for our benefit!
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.orionworks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
ieve this
is a genuine document, that's their problem. They will never allow a
link to a document like this anyway. They can't link to my copy
(Wikipedia automatically rejects links to LENR-CANR.org) and they
wouldn't want to link to Krivit's copy.
The latest comments on the w
have to be an idiot
to presume all the authors had been systematically sent this "faked"
DIA document in a sinister plan to discredit the field of research. Of
course, the belief in such "conspiracies" runs rampant within certain
sectors of the UFO community.
> If you (or t
authors, I guess.
I am sure of the pedigree because the authors sent me the document.
If you (or the skeptics at Wikipedia) are not sure of the pedigree, I
suggest y'all ignore the document. It is not all that important. I
mean, it is a fine job and I am glad they wrote it, but there is
nothi
Jed sez:
...
> It was published by the Agency. Just not on the Internet. It was released on
> Friday the 13th. Do you think I would upload unpublished material?!? Do you
> think I want to get in trouble with a Federal agency?
I presume not! ;-)
...but that does not answer the principal question
;s not official.
>>
>
> By that standard we would not believe the ERAB report is real, or the
> comments made by the 2004 DoE reviewers. Or any of hundreds of skeptical
> papers published before 2000 that are not on the web. But the skeptics
> would
> never apply that standard to t
the web. But the skeptics would
> never apply that standard to those documents because they support the
> skeptical point of view. Along the same lines, at Wikipedia Hipocryte wrote:
>
> "[The DIA document is] a primary source. Primary sources are not notable
> unless they ar
wers. Or any of hundreds of skeptical
papers published before 2000 that are not on the web. But the skeptics would
never apply that standard to those documents because they support the
skeptical point of view. Along the same lines, at Wikipedia Hipocryte wrote:
"[The DIA document is] a primary so
e of cards and here
> comes the wind  :_)
>
> -Fran
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Esa Ruoho"
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 1:27:01 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hilarious
2009 1:27:01 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hilarious response to DIA paper in Wikipedia
endless fun. where's my rubber mallet so i can hit my forehead with it
continuously
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Jed Rothwell < jedrothw...@gmail.com > wrote:
In a way
endless fun. where's my rubber mallet so i can hit my forehead with it
continuously
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:51 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> In a way, ya gotta love these people! See:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cold_fusion#U.S._Defense_Intelligence_Agency_document
>
> - Jed
>
>
In a way, ya gotta love these people! See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cold_fusion#U.S._Defense_Intelligence_Agency_document
- Jed
ttle. Perhaps
he is someone who has not attended any conferences I know of. More
power to him, anyway.
This is a discussion of Huke's work, which -- as I said in my review
-- McKubre considers one of the most important studies in this
field. The commentator V sums up the situation at
not attended any conferences I know of. More power
to him, anyway.
This is a discussion of Huke's work, which -- as I said in my review
-- McKubre considers one of the most important studies in this field.
The commentator V sums up the situation at Wikipedia:
"I'd like to know how
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
...
> >For the life of me I tried to cut & past in the URL to this specific
> >Wikipedia CNN video clip but was unsuccessful. I can only suggest
> >going to CNN.COM, click on the "video" link (Upper right hand corner)
> >and scroll
At 10:27 AM 9/3/2009, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
There is an amusing cnn.com VIDEO entry listing several notable (and
quite erroneous) Wikipedia entries, along with the organization's
attempt to rectify the problem. Wikipedia plans to implement more
stringent record ke
There is an amusing cnn.com VIDEO entry listing several notable (and
quite erroneous) Wikipedia entries, along with the organization's
attempt to rectify the problem. Wikipedia plans to implement more
stringent record keeping methodologies. Wiki hopes to better track
authors making entries, m
--- William Beaty wrote:
> Here's a second solution: start another Wikipedia.
> See the announcement
> to follow: Alternapedia.org
You've got my vote. Sounds good. I don't know if I
have anything really to contribute there myself, but
I'm glad you make it.
--Kyle
Starting a new wiki service!
Everyone here has seen the situation on Wikipedia. The place attracts
droves of self-styled "scientific skeptics" who gut articles, create edit
wars, and make sure WP eliminates any serious consideration of anomalies
research or "odd" sci
>From Terry:
> http://www.lenr-canr.org/StudentsGuide.htm
>
> Terry
>> See:
>>
>> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-make-your-own-books-from-wikipedia/
>> http://tinyurl.com/c9l3lg
>>
>> How'bout a primer on CF?
Would it be worth it to t
http://www.lenr-canr.org/StudentsGuide.htm
Terry
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:32 AM, OrionWorks wrote:
> See:
>
> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-make-your-own-books-from-wikipedia/
> http://tinyurl.com/c9l3lg
>
> How'bout a primer on CF?
>
> steve
> --
&g
See:
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-make-your-own-books-from-wikipedia/
http://tinyurl.com/c9l3lg
How'bout a primer on CF?
steve
--
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
I submitted an edited version of the subject article mainly due to
comments that some of the wikipedia articles I referenced might be
inappropriate or offensive in that context. Hopefully the present
list of articles is not offensive in any way.
On Feb 14, 2009, at 9:12 AM, Horace Heffner
Wikipedia has been infested by a cult of denial, censorship, and
hypocracy that casts a dark shadow on the spirit of wiki and the
freedom of information that is the spirit of the internet itself.
The members of this cult regard themselves as sufficient experts in
the fields of cold fusion
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:47:50 -0600 (CST):
Hi,
[snip]
>R C Macaulay wrote:
>
>> Howdy Harry,
>> Capitalism has no style.
>> Capitalism, by practice.. is predatory. Richard
>>
>Capitalism is a mechanism for wealth production. It works quite well,
>individual ince
R C Macaulay wrote:
Howdy Harry,
Capitalism has no style.
Capitalism, by practice.. is predatory. Richard
Capitalism is a mechanism for wealth production. It works quite well,
individual incentive, like every time it's been tried. IMHO, what you
don't like is private enterprise in the pocket
Terry Blanton wrote:
Only that Jacob Lewis Bourjaily (the originator) might one day wish
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jbourj/money.htm
Einstein is his first.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 2:14 AM, thomas malloy wrote:
R C Macaulay wrote:
Howdy Bill,
From: "William Beaty"
Does
Howdy Harry,
Capitalism has no style.
Capitalism, by practice.. is predatory. Richard
Howdy Thomas,
Yes , it does. It is a clue to how the public citizen can protect
themselves
against the government.. Form private people trusts that print
their own
barter medium and these trusts only trade
- Original Message -
From: R C Macaulay
Date: Sunday, January 25, 2009 6:10 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia deletion: Pseudoskepticism
> Howdy Thomas,
> Yes , it does. It is a clue to how the public citizen can protect
> themselves
> against the government.. Form pr
Howdy Thomas,
Yes , it does. It is a clue to how the public citizen can protect themselves
against the government.. Form private people trusts that print their own
barter medium and these trusts only trade among themselves and their trustee
shareholders.
" Revelation 13:16 He required everyo
On Sun, 25 Jan 2009, thomas malloy wrote:
Does this image say anything to any of you people?
http://www.plasma-universe.com/images/e/e1/Kristian-birkeland-bank-note-front.jpg
I once had fantasies of starting a science-exhibits company and building
Terellas for major museums.
Hey, it looks lik
Pam Boss wrote to me the other day: "It is just awful what has happened to
the cold fusion wiki article. All my pretty pictures are gone. Given the
effort the skeptics are putting into the whole thing, they must feel
threatened."
I told her I think Wikipedia has become a sort of c
Only that Jacob Lewis Bourjaily (the originator) might one day wish
his image was on currency. He has collected five pages of such
imagery:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jbourj/money.htm
Einstein is his first.
Terry
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 2:14 AM, thomas malloy wrote:
> R C Macaulay wrote:
R C Macaulay wrote:
Howdy Bill,
From: "William Beaty"
Does this image say anything to any of you people?
http://www.plasma-universe.com/images/e/e1/Kristian-birkeland-bank-note-front.jpg
--- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! --
http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html --
Howdy Bill,
PS is alive and well.
Richard
http://www.plasma-universe.com/index.php/Pseudoskepticism
From: "William Beaty"
To:
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 4:20 PM
Subject: [Vo]:Wikipedia deletion: Pseudoskepticism
Should we give up on WP entirely?I have. But I stumb
Should we give up on WP entirely?I have. But I stumbled across
something creepy...
A single person is trying to remove the WP Pseudoskepticism page in
dishonest fashion: by trimming it down to one brief paragraph, proposing a
merge (with no discussion, of course,) then merging it with Tr
Howdy Harry,
Many a true word is spoken in jest, However , in the case of baby boom
economics, birth control and abortion negated the grand scheme behind social
security but .. not to worry... the wise in DC and the Catholic church
figured out a way to import babies,
As in all pie in the sk
nuary 21, 2009 11:04 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia, cold fusion, and censorship
> Further to big D's
> . Over the past 25 years the Gov't, States, Cities, business and
> people have been on a spending spree financed mostly by bonds. An
> estimated 150-300 trillion in bond
Further to big D's
. Over the past 25 years the Gov't, States, Cities, business and people have
been on a spending spree financed mostly by bonds. An estimated 150-300
trillion in bonds have been sold. Where did the money go? a third of it went to
fees and commissions, lawyers, Insurance firms,
Howdy Jones,
Since not even the people that invented derivatives can explain what they are..
and .. since they are not actually carried on any ledger, how would a bank
evaulate a big D? Unless.. well.. err.. that's the purpose behind them.
There is some 350 trillion( nobody knows how much mor
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:37:32 -0800 (PST):
Hi,
[snip]
>Richard,
>
>What are the objections of the New Admin prohibiting all publicly traded banks
>and corporations from owning or trading derivatives?
[snip]
In my opinion it isn't really the instrument itself that
Jed Rothwell wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
Wow! Like the Tower of Babble.
There is a tremendous unfinished tower in the middle of Pyongyang,
North Korea, called the Ryugyong Hotel Tower. It is eerie! People
pretend it is not there. See:
Who the hell would want to visit North Korea? Thanks f
Richard,
What are the objections of the New Admin prohibiting all publicly traded banks
and corporations from owning or trading derivatives?
From: R C Macaulay
Like illusionalists, Dubai and many so called
sovereign wealth fund nations, are composed of
Like illusionalists, Dubai and many so called sovereign wealth fund nations,
are composed of smoke and mirrors like Enron. Come payday and the response is
'no sabe'.
Perhaps the largest magician of all is Merrill Lynch. They passed themselves
off to BoA as pure cherry pie. Not even the Fed can
I just heard that the people who were building the city, of which the
aforementioned tower is a part, have run out of money. Given the price of
oil last summer, I'm surprised about this.
Wow! Like the Tower of Babble.
There is a tremendous unfinished tower in the middle of Pyongyang, Nort
Apparently Wikipedia allows anyone to make changes to the text. Kinda like
giving monkeys permanet markers and turning them loose in an art gallery, eh?
Jed,
I debated if it would be more accurate to say:
"giving monkeys dry-erase markers and turning them loose in an art gallery&
thomas malloy wrote:
> Apparently Wikipedia allows anyone to make changes to the text. Kinda like
> giving monkeys permanet markers and turning them loose in an art gallery,
> eh?
Exactly!
> The truth is what squares with physical reality. Like when you run out of
> money b
R C Macaulay wrote:
Howdy Thomas,
The problem with embarking on the course taken by Wikipedia is the
original error they built into their guidance system.
Apparently Wikipedia allows anyone to make changes to the text. Kinda
like giving monkeys permanet markers and turning them loose in an
thomas malloy wrote:
Wikipedia, the DoE and many other institutions have failed to deal
with cold fusion, and probably many other subjects too. We don't
know how many others, because they have been suppressed.
Brilliant Jed. The question is how can we stop it. More to the
point, can we
Howdy Thomas,
The problem with embarking on the course taken by Wikipedia is the original
error they built into their guidance system. Ole Pilate was sorta confused
with a similar problem way back when he asked Jesus.. " what is truth?" The
Dime Box Saloon solved the problem by
Howdy Horace,
Add "incest" to the subject lists in Wikipedia list to make it complete. Of
course, one must understand it's all in the interest of science.
Richard
Horace wrote,
Wiki provides articles titled: Alchemy, Astrology, Numerology, Magic,
Witchcraft, Demonology, Conjur
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Hear, hear.
Wikipedia, the DoE and many other institutions have failed to deal
with cold fusion, and probably many other subjects too. We don't know
how many others, because they have been suppressed.
Brilliant Jed. The question is how can we stop it. More to the
Hear, hear.
Wikipedia, the DoE and many other institutions have failed to deal with cold
fusion, and probably many other subjects too. We don't know how many others,
because they have been suppressed.
- Jed
tutions fail to deal with controversy. I think the only foolproof
approach is to have many different, independent, competing institutions. A
decentralized system. That is the essence of free market capitalism. It is a
mistake to rely too much on Wikipedia or Google on the web, or on the DoE
for
My machine address would not show on a webap mailer; however, Google
can verify a valid recipient of a message.
Terry
On 1/17/09, Steven Krivit wrote:
> Terry,
>
> Which one is your ip?
>
> Steve
>
> At 06:55 AM 1/17/2009, you wrote:
> > Delivered-To: hohlr...@gmail.com
> > Received: by 10.65.
Terry,
Which one is your ip?
Steve
At 06:55 AM 1/17/2009, you wrote:
Delivered-To: hohlr...@gmail.com
Received: by 10.65.110.6 with SMTP id n6cs72790qbm;
[snip]
;s encouragement) to an international
> Wikimedia "meta" blacklist. People in Italy are suffering from the
> consequences of blacklisted access to lenr-canr.org.
>
What does this mean? I hope you mean that people using the Italian version
of Wikipedia are blocked from LENR-CANR.org. N
m
From: Steven Krivit
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
In-Reply-To:
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20090114181346.03751...@gmail.com>
<7.0.1.0.2.20090114180724.038f7...@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii";
So noted
At 09:48 PM 1/16/2009, you wrote:
Wikipedia has been infested by a cult of denial, censorship, and
hypocracy that casts a dark shadow on the spirit of wiki and the
[snip]
Wikipedia has been infested by a cult of denial, censorship, and
hypocracy that casts a dark shadow on the spirit of wiki and the
freedom of information that is the spirit of the internet itself.
The members of this cult regard themselves as sufficient experts in
the fields of cold fusion
have an insider at Wiki
that could help us ?
I have found that Citizendium was born as an offshoot of Wikipedia for many
of the exact reasons that we are aware of, with regard to Wikipedia's faults.
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Citizendium
Steve
unless, as I've heard you used Gmail which does not include originating IP
in the headers.
can anybody confirm/disconfirm?
At 07:42 AM 1/15/2009, you wrote:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> A "link" meaning what? A copy of an e-mail message? That can easily be
> faked.
The machinations of the skeptics at Wikipedia are hysterical.
- Jed
== Surrealistic discussion of LENR-CANR.org and Jed Rothwell ==
I do not know if I am allowed to contribute here, but someone informed me
there is a surrealistic conversation underway here about me. So perhaps you
will allow me
Terry sez:
> Piki?
I must confess that I use Wiki (Oink-Oink-Piki!) a lot. It's a quik
invaluable informational resource for NON CONTROVERSIAL subjects.
It should be obvious to anyone by now that relying on Wiki for
information on issues possessing a modicum of controversy is
indicative of lazy
Piki?
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:55 PM, R C Macaulay wrote:
> Howdy Jed,
>
> At some point in time an awareness arrives that Wiki is a "closed society
> website" disguised as an open forum and posting information source.
> Like the joke about inspectors.. one can argue with an inspector.. but li
Howdy Jed,
At some point in time an awareness arrives that Wiki is a "closed society
website" disguised as an open forum and posting information source.
Like the joke about inspectors.. one can argue with an inspector.. but like
wrestling with a pig in the mud.. sooner or later.. it dawns on yo
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:30:07 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>
>
>> The gist of the argument appears to be that you need explicit permission in
>> each
>> case. Since you claim to have such permission, perhaps you could include a
>> link
>> with eac
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> A "link" meaning what? A copy of an e-mail message? That can easily be
> faked.
Not if you include the hidden "header" information. It becomes
entirely traceable.
Terry
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
> The gist of the argument appears to be that you need explicit permission in
> each
> case. Since you claim to have such permission, perhaps you could include a
> link
> with each uploaded paper pointing to the explicit permission you received
> for
> that paper, or wh
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:17:11 -0500:
Hi Jed,
[snip]
>As you may have noticed, your site http://lenr-canr.org has been
>added to Wikipedia's blacklist of SPAM sites. I believe this is
>missuse of the spam blacklisting process to enforce a narrow point-of-view.
>
Wikipedia skeptics recently blocked Pierre Carbonnelle, which is an
outrage. One of them told me that I have been blocked from editing,
which is unimportant. Anyway, it seems he was bluffing, because I was
able to post a message there. Maybe it is erased?
Anyway, that's not important
d forgiving with these
people than they deserved. The fact that they threw you out is proof
that Wikipedia is fundamentally an intolerant, Authoritarian
organization. . . ."
("Authoritarian" as defined by Altemeyer:
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ I have refrained from cal
Sorry for the double post, thought I was on the wrong account :-(
-Original Message-
From: Stiffler Scientific [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Explosively pumped flux compression generator -
Wikipedia, the
Isn't this similar to what the military uses for massive EMP generation?
-Original Message-
From: R.C.Macaulay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Explosively pumped flux compression generator - Wikipedia,
the
Isn't this the what the military is using for EMP devices in rockets, etc.?
-Original Message-
From: R.C.Macaulay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Explosively pumped flux compression generator - Wikipedia
Howdy Vorts,
Consider the potential for uses other than destroying things.
http://en.wikipedia.org:80/wiki/Flux_compression_generator
Richard
Pierre Carbonnelle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me:
"The time needed to police the article is very low now. I think that
this is because the case was made properly to the skeptics, with the
support of 2004 DOE."
I told him I am glad he does not have waste his time, but the
skeptics I hear from
have free market competition with many different independent groups.
Here is an interesting and contradictory comment from an interview of
Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia:
"On other occasions, Wales has offered a more erudite account of the
site's origins and purpose. In 1945,
OrionWorks wrote:
>The following unflattering article published in COSMOS MAGAZINE
>regarding Dr. Mill's HYDRINO theory was originally intended to be
>posted over in Luke's HYDRINO discussion group but Luke respectfully
>rejected it for a number of legitimate reasons. This included the fact
>that
nyway since there are many here who might appreciate
the complexities and controversy in regards to the on-line
encyclopedia, Wikipedia, being accused of giving an air of unwarranted
legitimacy surrounding a controversial theory.
Ultimately, what concerned me personally, and why I felt compelle
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_DoE_panel_on_cold_fusion
This is surprisingly comprehensive.
I have to admit, the Wikipedia main article on cold fusion is holding
up remarkably well against skeptical attacks. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion
People such as Pierre
OrionWorks wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/01/24/microsoft.wikipedia.ap/index.html
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yvbeov
I bet Jed will find parts of it amusing.
That is funny. The last line quoting Wikipedia top dog Jimmy Wells is telling:
"Wales said the proper course
Vorts,
See the following article recently placed out at CNN.COM
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/01/24/microsoft.wikipedia.ap/index.html
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yvbeov
I bet Jed will find parts of it amusing.
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Terry Blanton wrote:
Wow. I certainly agree that Wikipedia deserves to be fu . . . , er, forked.
How did you do that using voice recog. software? :-)
You have to interrupt the process and perform what might be called a
manual adjustment, or handj . . .
Oops again. I mean you have to
On 12/13/06, Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wow. I certainly agree that Wikipedia deserves to be fu . . . , er, forked.
How did you do that using voice recog. software? :-)
Terry
Terry Blanton wrote:
http://citizendium.com/
Wow. I certainly agree that Wikipedia deserves to be fu . . . , er, forked.
This is an interesting document.
It seems to me that Wikipedia's worst problem is that all articles
reflect (or try to reflect) a unified point of view or a
http://citizendium.com/
Wikipedia with qualified expert advisors:
"A "progressive fork" works like this: we will begin with all of
Wikipedia's articles, so that the Citizendium will begin as, simply, a
mirror of Wikipedia. Then people start making changes to articles in
th
OrionWorks wrote:
Some thoughts regarding Wikipedia faults.
While I can sympathize with Jed's frustration with Wiki's apparent
inability to resolve informational disputes concerning CF,
particularly when opposing points start battling for dominance I'm
not willing
Steven Krivit wrote:
Well, some of you attempted to intervene, and I applaud you, whoever
it was, but it seems the like things are a bit out of control there at
the moment.
I'm appalled that such destruction could occur and that it has been
left to stand. Let them have their way. One day th
, October 04, 2006 9:57 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Steve Krivit NO LONGER urges participation in
Wikipedia
Well, some of you attempted to intervene, and I applaud you, whoever it
was, but it seems the like things are a bit out of control there at the
moment.
I'm appalled that
201 - 300 of 370 matches
Mail list logo
