AKA Hedgehog dilemma
- Dec 24, 2022
- Reaction score
Donate and support Agora Road's Macintosh Cafe to keep the forum alive and make any necessary upgrades to have a more pleasant experience! In addition, you will be able to have "moods" enabled on your profile and have donation only awards! Update: I configured the site with Brave Browser, so you can send tips to the site with BAT.
You can now donate directly to the forum without signing up for patreon. You will still have all of the same perks in patreon but its now one less sign up method. It will be under Account Upgrades
This thread has been viewed 1350 times.
You can tear pages out of one and put them in straws to roleplay tribals in your classes. Unfortunately the only thing you get if you tear the other is computer sparks, smoke, and sent to the principal's office.what is the difference if ANYONE could (do the same)?
no, the economic incentiveYou can tear pages out of one and put them in straws to roleplay tribals in your classes. Unfortunately the only thing you get if you tear the other is computer sparks, smoke, and sent to the principal's office.
Personally, for objective research I use Rationalwiki and Conservapedia
Just read this and was like, me frfr
Classic atheists from the mid-20th century were very reluctant to grant that there was an objective moral law because they saw that it was just too compelling for believers to take the easy step from the moral law to God who was the "moral law giver."
the image on the "woman" article and the massive argument about it is a great example of everything that's wrong with wikipedia. for reference, this is the current image:There was a tranny who got access to the article for women and changed the picture to another tranny, by the by.
I will just keep this short. There have been concerns about alleged biases in Wikipedia articles, especially on those connected to sensitive matters. Even worse, attempts to correct them have often been met with resistance from the moderators. However Wikipedia itself still remains the only place on the internet where one can freely and conveniently access knowledge of any subject with relative ease. So my suggestion is that instead of getting rid of Wikipedia altogether, should we just grab a section and spin it off into another project or something?
rationalwiki is full of atheist propaganda, and the other is just jewish shill amplifierPersonally, for objective research I use Rationalwiki and Conservapedia
Probavly one of the best articles I have ever seen about this theme.One of the cofounders of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger, has personally decried Wikipedia as biased. He provides a lot of good examples of how the original Neutral Point of View policy of Wikipedia has fallen apart.
but if times comes all narrative is controlled, everywhere, all scopes - then what?Probavly one of the best articles I have ever seen about this theme.
Should we split Wikipedia? As small open encyclopedias for specific themes (science, politics, music), yes. As a big, open alternative to Wikipedia? No. It wouldn't work, because Wikipedia already has the monopoly on science, music, art (and any non-political themes). A new alternative, unless a miracle happens and a group of people create a truly non-biased encyclopedia, would end up having a bias, either right-wing or left-wing.
The only solution that exists is simple: use more than just Wikipedia. Whether it is other kind of encyclopedias (like @RisingThumb 's Encyclopedia Britannica) or another kind of sources (especialized books and encyclopedias, sources with different points of view, etcetera). But at the end it all comes down to that simple and timeless solution.
We then move to North Sentinelese Island.but if times comes all narrative is controlled, everywhere, all scopes - then what?
lit. 1984 or BNW???
People involved with the media and the flow of information, are so narcissistic and stuck-up that they actually think (or thought) that they had total control over what the average person believed, and that they could manipulate their every action. Then Trump ran for president, they threw everything they had at him, and failed. The significance of that to them can't be overstated. I remember just before election night, there were articles being put out by journalists scolding other journalists, saying that 'yes of course Clinton is gonna win, because we're backing her, but shame on all of you for 'letting' things get to this point, that Trump is even a contender for president'.rationalwiki is full of atheist propaganda, and the other is just jewish shill amplifier
tbh i don't expect this much responses and i am too overwhelmed to read and acknowledge every single one of them, but many of you have described the problem better than i do. it is mainly the widespread "political correctness" issue that i want to address. as we've already known this isn't only limited to wikipedia, but have in fact been observed in many big name organizations. in the last five years there has been an unprecedented increase in crackdown aimed towards common knowledge in order to conform more into a widely promoted narrative we are put up with. just before trump became president, i remember back when wikipedia and google wouldn't suppress pieces of information that now would've been viewed as right-wing/dissident in perspective. but what can i do? i'm just a small person, and i think complaining would at least ease it up a bit.
Pop cultural references in this context are pretty lame, but I do think Azula's arc in A:TLA is a great example of this sort of mentality. She was so confident that she knew everything and could manipulate anyone and everyone she wanted - only to first be shocked when Zuko turned his back on the Fire Nation, and then have her worldview utterly destroyed after Mai and Tai Lee turned on her to save him. The last few episodes of the show have her becoming increasingly paranoid and schizophrenic, banishing people left and right because she doesn't have that absolute confidence anymore, and genuinely can't tell anymore if someone just made a mistake, or if they're secretly conspiring against her.
Yes or no? I dont understand what you want to sayPeople involved with the media and the flow of information, are so narcissistic and stuck-up that they actually think (or thought) that they had total control over what the average person believed, and that they could manipulate their every action. Then Trump ran for president, they threw everything they had at him, and failed. The significance of that to them can't be overstated. I remember just before election night, there were articles being put out by journalists scolding other journalists, saying that 'yes of course Clinton is gonna win, because we're backing her, but shame on all of you for 'letting' things get to this point, that Trump is even a contender for president'.
Trump proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the media DID NOT have control over what the common man thinks, that they WEREN'T able to influence their actions. You can see the effects of this even with absolute nobodies in the realm of media like Nostalgia Critic - When Zootopia came out, he made a video on it where he said that he personally is tired of 'women power' morals in film, but that it's apparently still necessary because 'Trump was still in the lead', and, I quote 'I don't know where all these people [voting for him] are coming from! They're crawling out of caves in the ground!'
This is also why Gamergate became such a huge thing and why the media seethed about it for so long - people rejected their narrative on such a large scale that they couldn't ignore it or dismiss it. It popped the echo chamber bubble they had crafted for themselves where they are the masters and the world their puppets. But Gamergate was confined to the specific realm of games journalism, populated by the rejects from the entire industry, whereas Trump defied the most powerful media figures in the world and got away with it.
And this is why there's been such an immense crackdown on all forms of dissident information by the tech giants and the media. Where once they could shrug it off because they were completely self-assured that they were utterly in control, now that safety net of absolute confidence they had is gone. This is why they're still obsessed with Trump to the point of holding a pointless impeachment trial and trying to send him to prison even though that wouldn't really do anything. Assuming current global society even lasts that long, I guarantee you we'll still be hearing about Trump DECADES down the line.
And, for that matter, this is why Hitler also remains such a boogeyman - the people in power don't care one bit about any war crimes or authoritarianism, they're far worse than he ever was in that regard. The actual reason is because they believed that they had absolute control over the masses, what they believed, and how they lived their lives, and Hitler not only proved them wrong on a continent-crushing scale, he nearly brought down their entire power structure almost single-handedly. From those days on there's been a certain amount of paranoia on their part, and it's why the holocaust keeps getting touted as 'the worst event in history', Hitler as 'the most evil man in history', why the phrase 'never again' is emphasized so heavily in German schools, etc.
|Should we have a minimum wage at all?||General Discussion||66|
|how should act in a nightclub||General Discussion||19|
|Been thinking about trying COD Black Opps which one should I get?||Video Games||2|
|What ordinary people should know about Buddhism||Current Events, Philosophy, & Paranormal.||38|
|The like system should be removed.||General Discussion||31|
|should i delerte?||General Discussion||6|
|I recently built my first decent PC, what should I play?||Video Games||33|
|Should you be able to profit off of sampled music from small artists?||Vaporwave General||15|
|German politicians are limp-dick subhuman retards who should be deported to Antartica.||Current Events, Philosophy, & Paranormal.||15|
|[POLL] Should we have a "Personal Projects" board?||General Discussion||14|