Wikipedia's perfection (was Re: Discussion of the relative advantages/disadvantages of PAE (was Re: Memory >3.5GB not used?))

illoai at illoai at
Fri Apr 27 22:11:13 UTC 2007

On 27/04/07, Bart Silverstrim <bsilver at> wrote:
> We don't devote time and
> resources into being "renaissance people".

Human intelligence is hardly limited in that regard.
While I do not subscribe to the Colin Wilson theory,
the vast majority of people contain so little information
it is quite shameful, and the less you learn the harder
it is to learn.

These arguments about ethics show how truly shallow
ethicists bother to think.  Wikipedia is a daycare centre
which has given out a nearly unlimited number of crayons
and is now complaining about children drawing on the
walls.  It is also a fairly plain example of the cliche of the
inmates running the asylum.  To assign scholarly status
and impute scholarly ethics on such a nonsensical rubbish
pile is as silly as taking my arguments here as more than
the ranting of a deranged keyboard jockey.

What that purported professor did is no more unethical
than crapping in somone else's toilet, and to claim other-
wise is to elevate it to a king's throne.

Once wikipedia (and its ilk) begin to systematically vet
contributors for expertise and seriously review articles
against fact we can nail them to the wall for political bias.


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list