On 4/18/06, Ben Yates bluephonic@gmail.com wrote:
Sure, but none of their criticisms are about the developers; they're all about the editors and admins. Don't get me wrong -- I've read through the site, and sometimes they seem like assholes -- but I think that the question deserves serious thought: are attack sites like this just a product of the huge wikipedia userbase, or are wikipedia's problems severe enough that WikiTruth is an understandable response?
No. Some are due simply to wikipedia's size (succeed and some people will attack you). However a lot are due to people falling out with Wikipedia on a personal level. They are not "assholes" just people who for one reason or another can't work too well with the Wikipedia community (ok there are some exceptions). When blocked they look for someone to blame. The cabal, rogue admins the system whatever.
I think the answer is the former, but every time attacks are answered with mockery rather than thought I get nudged toward the latter.
The problem is a lot of the stuff comes from people we know and have long since become fed up with. A lot of the rest is just the same repeated acusations that we all know and love .
Once you extract the namecalling from wikitruth what you are left with are the standard critism of WP:OFFICE and Jimbo. Their Vandalism exposed article is outdated (particularly in the case of en.wikipedia). I suspect they probably do have an admin on board. Other than wishing they would follow the GFDL I don't really care.
-- geni