[WikiEN-l] Durova/!! matter now in newspaper.

[Ral315]

On Dec 3, 2007 10:20 PM, <joshua.zelinsky at yale.edu> wrote:

> Well, that was a less than NPOV little hit piece. Did they even bother
> asking
> anyone for an opinion who didn't have a negative opinion of the whole
> thing?
>
> This piece reads so badly I'm almost inclined to wonder if the primary
> source
> wasn't some very strongly anti-Durova editor. But of course that couldn't
> happen because editors who frown on secrecy would never try to do that,
> nor try
> to use a newspaper to get their way. Frak'n ridiculous.


To call The Register a newspaper is quite a stretch (even if they are,
technically).  Their business model is to piss off as many people as
possible in order to increase page views and ad revenue.  They've found that
Wikipedians get pissed off quite frequently, and decided to go with it on a
regular basis.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/17/jimmy_wales_shot_dead_says_wikipedia/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/06/wikipedia_otrs_volunteers/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/02/wikipedia_fraud/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/20/wikipedia_aphrodites_araldite/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/18/wales_sanger_interviews/

-- 
Sincerely,
Ral315
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ral315