-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Wikipedia Ita
- Thread starter pasqsn
- Start date
C
Classy@Home
I concur - there is an Italian section for this, no???
oh noes! wiki forced to operate within journalistic standards... the horror.
C
Classy@Home
Bang on - wiki is a joke - best way to kill an argument is to quote it...
Run by idiots, written by idiots, quoted by idiots - journalistic integrity not possible when any bone head can chip in...
Encyclopedia Moronica
Care to cite some examples of why Wikipedia is so bad in your guys opinions? I mean yeah there have been some factual errors on there, but they seem to get deleted very soon after publishing if they are way off base. Tell me why I should not trust the wikipedia page for something like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis
Is there something on that page that is inaccurate? Some misinformation I'm not seeing?
I think making blanket statements saying "well if someone uses such and such site in an argument automatically means their argument is wrong" invalidates your point just as much as anything wikipedia might or might not have published on their site. And I'm not speaking specifically to you C@H, just to that sentiment which I have seen others express on here and at other sites I frequent that wikipedia is never to be trusted and it's users are idiots.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis
Is there something on that page that is inaccurate? Some misinformation I'm not seeing?
I think making blanket statements saying "well if someone uses such and such site in an argument automatically means their argument is wrong" invalidates your point just as much as anything wikipedia might or might not have published on their site. And I'm not speaking specifically to you C@H, just to that sentiment which I have seen others express on here and at other sites I frequent that wikipedia is never to be trusted and it's users are idiots.
Last edited:
A lie can travel the world before the truth can get out of bed.
Your one example may, at this minute, be correct but next minute, all bets are off. Any one can write anything, any time they please. Great for a forum, lousy for an encyclopedia.
In order for a source to be trusted there needs to be some sort of peer review prior to publication. Archaeoraptor anyone?
It is an enormous hindrance to those of us who like to make up complete and utter bullshit.
It kills the creative urge.
It's just no fun if they can find out you're lying.
Seriously though, Europeans are getting some really strange laws going on their books about speech. The truth doesn't matter but what is important is that someone's feeling are hurt by saying that truth.
In England, calling Roman Polanski a pedophile would be libel even though he admitted having sex with a 13 year old.
America has no shortage of seriously flawed law, but this curtailing of freedom seems very ominous if you accept the idea that the erosion of liberty is a drop by drop process and it's acceptance becomes a contagion because it seems reasonable.
The truth of a statement should be it's defense that can't be negated by it's 'impoliteness'.
It kills the creative urge.
It's just no fun if they can find out you're lying.
Seriously though, Europeans are getting some really strange laws going on their books about speech. The truth doesn't matter but what is important is that someone's feeling are hurt by saying that truth.
In England, calling Roman Polanski a pedophile would be libel even though he admitted having sex with a 13 year old.
America has no shortage of seriously flawed law, but this curtailing of freedom seems very ominous if you accept the idea that the erosion of liberty is a drop by drop process and it's acceptance becomes a contagion because it seems reasonable.
The truth of a statement should be it's defense that can't be negated by it's 'impoliteness'.
C
Classy@Home
On the contrary (IMVHO)
It allows the dissemination of total balderdash by anyone competent enuff to type even slightly legibly...
Like me!!!
Woe the world if my insane ravings leave this site - and be posted as "cough" gospel "cough" (sorry, I loathe gospels).
I could spin horseshit into gold - given enuff editing time...
Rumpelstiltskin be damned...
