On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
Dan Tobias wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
No, we like The Simpsons, so it's an exception.
On 10/14/07, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
Dan Tobias wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
No, we like The Simpsons, so it's an exception.
No, we don't like the Simpsons, we liked them--so is it still an exception? It didn't exactly jump the shark in my opinion, so much as it ran out of water to continue water skiing in.
KP
On 10/14/07, Daniel R. Tobias dan@tobias.name wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
So, when we redirect [[The Simpsons]] to [[Clown]] (or is it [[Krusty the Clown]]?) per the Bauder proposal do we also have to remove the
5000 internal links to the article?
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?offset=&limit=5000&target=The_Si...]
In any case, I think that so long as it only advocated killing Wikipedians non-specifically or at least avoided criticizing certain high ranking cabal members, that it probably hasn't crossed the line as imposed thus far.
:D
Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
Are you unaware of the difference between mentions of Wikipedia, criticisms of Wikipeida and its editors , and harassment of editors?
Harassment is a different thing from criticism.
W.
On 10/15/07, Will Beback will.beback.1@gmail.com wrote:
Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
Are you unaware of the difference between mentions of Wikipedia, criticisms of Wikipeida and its editors , and harassment of editors?
Harassment is a different thing from criticism.
W.
All joking aside, if one had to classify this as harassment or criticism, I would say the former. But of course it's neither, it's parody.
But if Daniel Brandt instead of Matt Groening had something like this up, I guarantee that a lot of people would be screaming for even further sanctions against him (whatever that might be).
BTW, The Simpsons is still funny. ~~~~
Gabe Johnson wrote:
... if Daniel Brandt instead of Matt Groening had something like this up, I guarantee that a lot of people would be screaming for even further sanctions against him (whatever that might be).
Why, not linking to his sites *even more*, of course. It is, after all, the most potent weapon we wield.
On 10/15/07, Gabe Johnson gjzilla@gmail.com wrote:
But if Daniel Brandt instead of Matt Groening had something like this up, I guarantee that a lot of people would be screaming for even further sanctions against him (whatever that might be).
I'm waiting for Brandt to make a Pynchon-esque[1] appearance on the show. That ought to boost the ratings a fair bit.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Pynchon#2000s
—C.W.
Will Beback wrote:
Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
Are you unaware of the difference between mentions of Wikipedia, criticisms of Wikipeida and its editors , and harassment of editors?
Harassment is a different thing from criticism.
Strongly seconded. Daniel is committing a pretty clear straw man fallacy.
--Jimbo
On 15/10/2007, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
Are you unaware of the difference between mentions of Wikipedia, criticisms of Wikipeida and its editors , and harassment of editors?
Harassment is a different thing from criticism.
Strongly seconded. Daniel is committing a pretty clear straw man fallacy.
Myself, I assumed he was committing a pretty clear joke.
On 10/15/07, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 15/10/2007, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Strongly seconded. Daniel is committing a pretty clear straw man fallacy.
Myself, I assumed he was committing a pretty clear joke.
Pretty sad that we can't confidently tell the jokes from the arguments around here.
This time I thought it was a joke and responded in-kind.
On 10/15/07, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 15/10/2007, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Strongly seconded. Daniel is committing a pretty clear straw man fallacy.
Myself, I assumed he was committing a pretty clear joke.
Yes I think this whole thread was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek (except that bit about Thomas Pynchon). :p
—C.W.
On 15/10/2007, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
Are you unaware of the difference between mentions of Wikipedia, criticisms of Wikipeida and its editors , and harassment of editors?
Harassment is a different thing from criticism.
Strongly seconded. Daniel is committing a pretty clear straw man fallacy.
on 10/15/07 3:41 PM, Andrew Gray at shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
Myself, I assumed he was committing a pretty clear joke.
Me too. I'm amazed it's been carried this far.
Marc
Marc Riddell wrote:
On 15/10/2007, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
On tonight's Simpsons episode, an imprisoned criminal tells his visiting girlfriend to kill the guy who's been editing his biography in Wikipedia. Gasp... harrassment of a Wikipedian! Stop linking to that evil show right away!
Are you unaware of the difference between mentions of Wikipedia, criticisms of Wikipeida and its editors , and harassment of editors?
Harassment is a different thing from criticism.
Strongly seconded. Daniel is committing a pretty clear straw man fallacy.
on 10/15/07 3:41 PM, Andrew Gray at shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
Myself, I assumed he was committing a pretty clear joke.
Me too. I'm amazed it's been carried this far.
I'm amazed to find that near as I can tell from the archives this is the first thing that Jimmy has posted to this mailing list since August 29. After all this very serious debate about attack sites and foundation policies and community issues, the nearly two-month silence is broken with a single-line response to a joke thread wherein he misses the joke.
Not sure what it signifies, if anything, just kind of odd.