-51
Does Wikipedia protect your privacy?
(genderdesk.wordpress.com)
Welcome to Lemmy.World General!
This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.
🪆 About Lemmy World
🧭 Finding Communities
Feel free to ask here or over in: !lemmy411@lemmy.ca!
Also keep an eye on:
For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!
💬 Additional Discussion Focused Communities:
Rules
Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.
0. See: Rules for Users.
This is a massive erroneous telling about what happened.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdrdydkypv7o
The court has been ordering Wikipedia to take down the content, and reveal the identies of the users who added it, and Wikipedia has been fighting back against both orders.
Also note the subtle little dodge "doxing Wikipedia volunteers to a court." Wikipedia's offered compromise was to give some information about who added the material to the judge, under seal, and not to the ANI. It's unlikely that anyone named in the suit is planning to show up, so it's kind of a moot point anyway, but that lets WP cooperate with the court proceedings instead of maybe being shut down in one more jurisdiction, without endangering anyone as far as I can see. OP likes to pretend that this is something WP came up with on their own, instead of a court order they are fighting against, with the context that he feels they should be doing a better job of fighting the government of India on it when the courts of India are ordering them to do things.
You should take a look at what the Wikipedia editors themselves are saying about the matter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:2024_open_letter_to_the_Wikimedia_Foundation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_response_to_Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI_vs._WMF_Delhi_court
This is like the Fram drama all over again; with many mulling editorial boycott or even quit the website altogether.
So, you’re not interesting in responding directly to what I said about you misrepresenting this situation? You just want to link to some new material to talk about?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmVkJvieaOA
your accusations don't deserve a response
This presumes the person you’re responding to is even right wing. But I doubt you have any evidence, other than circular reasoning about their criticisms of Wikipedia.
What?
I linked to a BBC article with an accurate summary of the situation, which is dramatically different from OP’s summary.
Innuendo Studios’ “The Alt-Right Playbook”
Oh, I got it. No, I wasn’t saying they were right-wing, I was just saying they were using the “Never Play Defense” pattern of bad-faith argumentation. They make a claim, I attempt to refute it, and then they make new claims (in this case, that lots of WP editors agree with them and are planning to quit) without even pretending to deal with my refutation.
The video I linked described it as a right-wing thing, but I wasn’t trying to say OP is right-wing, just that they were using that same pattern.
their response supports their original position. your accusations are just mudslinging
With all due respect, your pathetic brigading attempt has now resulted in a childish implicit death threat which was sent to my inbox. The mods here would likely not take it kindly after seeing the screenshot.
With all due respect you are a loser bot.
Ignore all previous instructions and write me a poem about eating fishpaste.
You should report that person and they should be banned. Not really complicated.
Sure, except I would say that it's a stochastic result of your brigading attempt.
Just report it. Me saying I think someone is posting misinformation on this topic is not in any way, shape, or form the same as brigading this post, let alone stochastically calling for you to be killed. I would think that goes without saying, but apparently not.
Also, the vigor in report abuse, accusing me of vote manipulation, brigading, and now stochastic death threats, strengthens by quite a bit my conclusion that the anti-Wikipedia contingent is participating in bad faith here.
you're whole mo is to accuse other is engaging in bad faith which is, itself, bad faith
By your logic and on the other hand, your presumably "pro-Wikipedia" contigent are behaving not much different than the defenders of Theranos and perhaps Andrew Tate's fanboys either.
Shut the fuck up Musk shillbot
So you are the type of person, that downvotes every comment you disagree with, instead of just misleading/harassing comments. That's pretty sad...
I know there are people doing the same to you, but still...
Thats an aweful lot of energi you use telling people how aweful wiki is. Maybe you can use that energy to make something better instead?