Good question. Pretty much Jimmy Wales' baby has gone from the "hot shit, website of THE FUTURE"
to a crumbling, `bot-filled wreck in less than twenty years. It's also
full of outright fabrications, spastically myopic coverage of certain
topics, edit wars, super-trolls (Willy on Wheels, anyone?), and paid
corporate spamming....but we will get to that in time.
The other kludge we will be examining is Wikipediocracy, mainly its message board.
The problem here is that many of the Wikipediocrats are ex-Wikipedians,
including some of their most monomaniacal editors and content providers
like "ScienceApologist" (who posts as "iii"), or "Afadsbad" (who under
the name "enwikibadscience" could not stop writing about Cwmhiraeth's
Wikipedia idiocy), and the Ukraine-supporting "Kiefer.Wolfowitz." It
doesn't help that the guy who is mainly considered to be the supremo of
the board, "EricBarbour" actually is only a moderator, and not an
administrator, so the poor user is left to the tender mercies of
"Zoloft" (a certain Mr. Burns of San Diego, California) and the master
do-nothing "greybeard" (allegedly one of the old-timey Usenet guys from
the era of cocaine spoons and leisure suits.) Much like with sausage, if
you like Wikipediocracy's blog, you definitely don't want to see how they come up with ideas for it on the message board.
It's going to be a bumpy ride.....
No comments:
Post a Comment