3 ms·

> Yup, I think state-sponsored editing of Wikipedia is shameful. You are free to think anything you like, but it makes no sense. Why state-sponsored editing is

by smsm42 7y ago

> Yup, I think state-sponsored editing of Wikipedia is shameful. You are free to think anything you like, but it makes no sense. Why state-sponsored editing is worse that, say, Taliban-sponsored or Hamas-sponsored or just-random-dudes-hating-jews-sponsored one? > Can't this be discussed without you invoking antisemitic tropes? Me invoking tropes? You came to a topic that has nothing to do with Israel and started blaming The Joos and their dirty money, somehow presenting Israel recognizing Wales - who, again, does not have editorial control over Wikipedia - as something shady. I think you've made your bed. > Possibly other state-sponsored actors have also infiltrated Wikipedia so it is not just about Israel. You don't say!

bjourne 7y ago
> You are free to think anything you like, but it makes no sense. Why state-sponsored editing is worse that, say, Taliban-sponsored or Hamas-sponsored or just-random-dudes-hating-jews-sponsored one? Because being paid to advance a state's interests by editing Wikipedia is morally wrong. Especially if you don't disclose that you are in a conflict of interest situation and you instead pretend to be a normal user. > Me invoking tropes? You came to a topic that has nothing to do with Israel and started blaming The Joos and their dirty money, I did nothing of the sort and I think you look very foolish by pretending that I did. > somehow presenting Israel recognizing Wales - who, again, does not have editorial control over Wikipedia - as something shady. Wales does have and exercises editorial control over Wikipedia. He has stepped in in numerous disputes and imposed his will. He has used his powers to get articles undeleted and reverted bans of users he thought were unfairly banned. Yes, I think it is odd that the WMF has never criticized Israel or its lobbying organizations for infiltrating Wikipedia, but The North Face's amateurish attempt gets scorned. The reason must be Wales' political biases.

by smsm42 7y ago

bjourne 7y ago

> You are free to think anything you like, but it makes no sense. Why state-sponsored editing is worse that, say, Taliban-sponsored or Hamas-sponsored or just-random-dudes-hating-jews-sponsored one? Because being paid to advance a state's interests by editing Wikipedia is morally wrong. Especially if you don't disclose that you are in a conflict of interest situation and you instead pretend to be a normal user. > Me invoking tropes? You came to a topic that has nothing to do with Israel and started blaming The Joos and their dirty money, I did nothing of the sort and I think you look very foolish by pretending that I did. > somehow presenting Israel recognizing Wales - who, again, does not have editorial control over Wikipedia - as something shady. Wales does have and exercises editorial control over Wikipedia. He has stepped in in numerous disputes and imposed his will. He has used his powers to get articles undeleted and reverted bans of users he thought were unfairly banned. Yes, I think it is odd that the WMF has never criticized Israel or its lobbying organizations for infiltrating Wikipedia, but The North Face's amateurish attempt gets scorned. The reason must be Wales' political biases.