User talk:LymanSchool
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Welcome
|
[edit] Questions and answers
[edit] Snips!
Ho, ho , ho, Dick! I really do think you are being teased here. You are just such a colorful character they think it is fun to get your goat! You do the anger routine so terribly well. I end up looking like an idiot so I don't even bother. Why bother? It is like saying, "go ahead, beat me up again." And they do.
For the ideals, well, maybe it is for the world for all practical purposes and maybe it is quasi-democratic for all practical purposes. The fact that it is so is pure philanthropy. There is a private owner whose foundation this is. You did give your articles to the foundation, which choses to let others work on them. Work on the articles is overseen by a hierarchy, far from democratic in structure. It choses to allow a significant degree of democracy in method. It's a situation like the good emperors of Rome, who could clamp down tyrannically at any time but chose not to. It doesn't work for society as a whole because before long you get a non-benevolent tyrant who does clamp down. There you need some real democracy. But for a privately owned encyclopedia this is fine.
I know what you mean about the articles. I was concerned for a while that valid information might not get to stay. I've seen powerful Wikipedians start pushing ideas that anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of the area knows is pure bunk yet they succeed by sheer aggression at getting that promulgated as the truth and stop anyopne from changing it. Or, you put in the most rudimentary knowledge that anyone can find in any beginning textbook and they arbitrarily decide that is wrong and force it out of the article. Those are the faults of Wikipedia.
But really there is some great stuff on here. What I do is like pattern bombing. I have certain areas that I would like to see up to competance so I hit them in what seems for all practical purposes random order. If it looks like I'm locking horns with some goat I do an end run to some to him irrelevant part of the encyclopedia. He quits following. Weeks or months later I slip back in. The only way you could totally frustrate me is to dog my user log. But these sorts of vandals are doing it for the power trip, they aren't interested in final solutions. It takes psycho to do that, not that there aren't any on here, but there are thousands of users here. Its the old defense by aggregate swarm and distract. That's why you don't use your real name.
So I would say really you have to get used to the idea that these are not your articles. As it says on the main page, well, you know what it says. There are some people on the Internet who have started their own sites like Wikipedia but on certain topics and they write articles in a controled setting, their articles. Well that's fine, but who's to pick up their mistakes? I got thousands of editors finding mine.
I got a grand suggestion, Dick. Now is the time for that book on Bernie. Ciao.Dave 03:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- More snips. Well, the professional job market became spotty with the stock market crash. It's a complex situation. Also, I'm being fussy. I am going to give you call.Dave 11:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
