They are admins, they are users, and they will ban you for defending yourself against them. If you try to persist, they will attempt to doxx you, and accuse you of being a sockpuppet. If you try to appeal the ban, they will decline and blame you for defending yourself. They will accuse you of not assuming in good faith, while they do the same for you. When they give their reasons, they are all low effort and vague truisms:
>stop editorializing >you are just blaming everyone else
You are not guilty, and the only way to get unbanned, is to admit you are guilty. But if you admit you are guilty, then you will not be unbanned.
Its all Saul Alinsky, and there is nothing you can do.
are you really just figuring this out now, OP? The only thing wikipedia should ever be used for is math, functional everyday physics (ie Newtonian) most simple chemistry, simple biology, and zoology. That's it.
God fucking save your soul if you ever look at the talk pages for any kind of politically or economically related shit, though. > the wikipedia page on gamer gate as someone who actually paid attention to what happened when it happened, wikipedia as a source of "reliable information" is fucking laughable and was utterly exposed to me then as being a piece of rotten shit a good 90% could be deleted and actually improve the site.
>what do...? stop feeding the beast. stop letting others feed the beast. starve it to death.
never donate money to it, and make sure no one you know donates to it.
Jack Brown
>left invents the internet >left are the early adopters >conservatards realize that the internet is useful >they want the internet to pander their beliefs ummmmmm, how about no
Brayden Perry
I believed in the community open source model. I grew up as such a good trusting christian boy... I try so hard to use reason, to be civil, even while everyone else was swearing at me.
If I made a good point, they would get some other guy to also call me a fucker, and then claim that they had consensus.
Two people who have no arguments > One person with a good argument.
Actually, the left invaded the internet only recently. And by left, I mean retarded American women.
Carson Thomas
>Left invents the internet
Is this what they taught you?
That a vaguely defined "wing" of a binary view of a far more realistically complex political spectrum "Invented The Internet"?
You might want to dial back on huffing dog farts, or whatever it is you do in your spare time.
It appears to be killing your powers of reasoning.
Daniel Parker
>Two people who have no arguments > One person with a good argument. It takes seconds to tell a lie: > "2+2=5"
It takes an exponential amount of time more to debunk that lie: > Some very complex math equations that prove what the number 2 represents, what the addition symbol means, what the equals sign means, and just why exactly when you put 2 and 2 together you're supposed to get 4 and ONLY 4 as a result
The only way to solve this problem is to literally beat the sense back into them. > but assaulting people is wrong sometimes, people who say that are the ones most in need of it, specifically because they want to keep playing their childish game of "avoid being punished for making an intentional mistake" if you don't agree with assaulting someone you can just imagine the punishment downgraded to whatever you like... simple imprisonment or isolation. the formula remains the same.
it's too bad we don't live in the wild any more. you make even an honest mistake out there you don't get a second chance to suffer the educational experience it would provide.
This is completely true and has been for many years t. former dedicated editor
Isaiah Williams
tl;dr we've constructed a civilization so advanced we're capable of denying reality's punishment for lies which contradict the reality in which we exist.
The only way to fix this is to get your own distributed internet over IPFS. Jow Forums will never do this because the average user is mentally limited/lazy and it's a big undertaking
Thomas Johnson
> (((discord))) nice honeypot attempt, fag why not ask me to join your IRC channel, too?
John Lopez
Definitely.
There is no point in pretending that democracy is of higher valour than authoritarianism, because when corruption seeps in and consensus becomes rigged, then authoritarianism becomes the last honest system.
They recently changed the definition of populism. It was pretty positive until recently
Henry Taylor
Bump.
Jackson Lopez
I had very, very similar experiences. My take: Coordinate efforts. When editing an article, have numerous others that share your view online, that will support your edit in the comments section. What counts for Wikipedia is apparently not the strength of the argument, but the number of supporters and their rank in Wikipedia. Ultimately, you will have to have some admins on your side.
