No it was just a nice discussion group started from the naysayers point of view -- this John guy threw it to the class with a little Red Herring bait on it (conservative jargon) on it -- and they all ate it up.
One guy actuall made a "vandal" change to Mars (planet) article -- just to prove that anyone could make wiki invalid as a source. (Mars is the third planet from the Sun named after the Klingon god of war" ) Of course they failed to mention that it was modified to better reflect the truth ;)
On toke oo from the great grand enlightenment doobie on its oo trip around the world, -S-
--- tarquin tarquin@planetunreal.com wrote:
Gutza wrote:
I think banning him would probably prove the point
that Wikipedia
isn't completely unregulated. But then again, it
would probably also
prove that we're fascists to such a person. Not
banning him would
prove him that Wikipedia is unreliable. Talking
about him proves that
we're a bunch of losers who have nothing better to
do. So I think
ignoring the guy would probably be the best thing
to do, along with
keeping an eye on his IP and reverting his
changes, should some more
occur in the future.
I want to talk to this guy. His opinions of wikipedia aside -- does he really derive amusement from causing damage to something other people have worked hard on? I thought humans grew out of the "kicking sandcastles" phase in late adolescence. Anyway, this is something I'll maybe raise on MeatBall. :)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com