On 7/26/07, Todd Allen
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
>> On 7/26/07, Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Sure. And we get to say it sucks. Ain't free speech great?
>> Even though wikipedia has been soundly panned by Harlan
>> Ellison, I can't help but refer you to his line about people not
>> being entitled to their opinion, but rather being entitled to an
>> *informed* opinion.
>> So far all the panning of metapedia has been based on pages
>> that had obviously been inserted there with the purpose of
>> disrupting the site. Saying it sucks because of such attempts
>> to disrupt the site in question is hardly an informed opinion.
>> There may be crappy content on metapedia inserted there
>> by its core contributor base, but I have yet to find any myself,
>> and more to the point, none of the people who have expressed
>> distaste at the site existing in the first place, have presented
>> such either. Saying that one disagrees with the ideology of
>> some group of people, is one thing, saying that what they
>> write is without merit is a separate question.
>> Infact what I have found so far, though often brief, compares
>> favourably to the content on _supposedly_ quality
>> oriented citizendium on the neutrality scale.
>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> I was talking about Conservapedia. I haven't read Metapedia, so I have
> no informed opinion there.
> On the other hand, I have read (as much as I could stomach) of
> Conservapedia. And my (thus informed) opinion is that it sucks. Take the
> worst POV revisions of every article we've got, and you got Conservapedia!
Please stop using wikien-l as a forum to bash other wikis. We knew
what you thought about them some number of posts ago. These comments
being made on a public mailing list don't do Wikipedia's public image
I neither think your conclusions are wrong nor want to infringe your
freedom to have and speak your opinions, but ongoing bashing on this
list is bad for Wikipedias' reputation.