SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - 5 Terrifying Bastardizations of the Wikipedia Model

Posted: May 12 2009 03:40 pm

I don't think he's anti-American, I think he's just frustrated that even though he speaks perfect English, some words have different meanings for us than they do for him.

I sympathize; I get extremely defensive about language too.

Joined: Aug 26 2007 Posts: 2752

Ummm . . . okay, i feel like changing the subject now.

How about that Furry Wikipedia, pretty out there isn't it. Let's Yiff it up!

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Syd Lexia wrote:

I don't think he's anti-American, I think he's just frustrated that even though he speaks perfect English, some words have different meanings for us than they do for him.

Yeah, that's probably the source of it. He just listed a bunch of random critiques against America though, and not all had to do with language. Seemed a bit random and odd to me.

Posted: May 12 2009 03:46 pm

To be fair, I baited him.

Joined: Aug 26 2007 Posts: 2752

You know this language barrier reminds me of my favorite cracked article. I'll post that one up next, it's worth it's own thread . . .

Oh and for some reason i've got KISS's "Lick it up" stuck in my head, but the word LICK is replaced with YIFF . . .

"Yiff it up, yiff-yiff it up . . . OHHHOHHHOH!!! It's only right now!!!"

Posted: May 12 2009 03:55 pm

Cattivo wrote:

Syd Lexia wrote:

I don't think he's anti-American, I think he's just frustrated that even though he speaks perfect English, some words have different meanings for us than they do for him.

Yeah, that's probably the source of it. He just listed a bunch of random critiques against America though, and not all had to do with language. Seemed a bit random and odd to me.

Yeah, but there's a difference between hating America and critiquing America. The best part of America, in my opinion, is the ability to speak up about something you don't like and hope that somebody hears, and I think that everybody should have that right, whether you're Polish, black, merman, or American.

To be fair though, we ought to get off the politcal stuff entirely. It does nothing but create bad blood and turn people into trolls.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

You're definitely right Eddie, it just seemed like it was bitter, spiteful critique, not fair critique.

I do like Nekkoru; these were his first posts that I have taken issue with.

He is a "he", correct? I forget. At this board, it's safe to assume that.

Posted: May 12 2009 04:36 pm

Well, to be honest, nobody's really sure what the fuck I am. Just be glad the English language doesn't have gender-specific verbs like Polish does.

For now, let's all assume I'm a perfectly neutral cookie. The dark chocolate kind with coconuts and almonds.

Posted: May 12 2009 04:57 pm

I HATE coconuts! Now you die!

I mean, agreed. Let's all get along.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Almond Joys? They're good but I prefer Bounty bars though, cuz they have milk chocolate and no nuts. They don't sell them in the states anymore, though. Crying

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: May 12 2009 05:36 pm

I didn't think any of that kerfluffle was supposed to be taken seriously. Was it?

Posted: May 12 2009 06:23 pm

I'm a Charleston Chew.

Posted: May 12 2009 07:14 pm

It was a candy setup! They were ALL Twix!

Posted: May 12 2009 08:17 pm

Yaknow, I think I'm detecting a right-wing bias on conservapedia...

Posted: May 13 2009 01:44 am

Nekkoru wrote:

And quit with that miles, ounces and pounds bullshit.

I agree. I really wish we'd go metric, but change doesn't come easy to Americans, as much as we wish for it.

Posted: May 13 2009 01:54 am

I was browsing Conservapedia for the past half an hour or so. l feel as if my brain was being gang-raped by smiling Dubyas.

Details at nine.

Posted: May 13 2009 01:59 am

Syd Lexia wrote:

George Washington Carver likely invented peanut butter first. He never bothered to patent or market most of his peanut uses.

Actually that's the one peanut product he DIDN'T have a hand in.

Posted: May 13 2009 06:02 am

Rycona wrote:

I agree. I really wish we'd go metric, but change doesn't come easy to Americans, as much as we wish for it.

The hell it doesn't! America is full of change. And hope. And change.

lordsathien wrote:

Actually that's the one peanut product he DIDN'T have a hand in.

I guess I was thinking of peanut sex lubricant. And really, aren't they the same thing?

Posted: May 13 2009 06:35 am

No, because peanut butter sometimes has unmixed peanuts inside.

Posted: May 13 2009 06:49 am

Not the good kind.

Posted: May 13 2009 08:48 am

The good kind does so. The REALLY GOOD peanut butter also sometimes has caramel or nougat.

Posted: May 13 2009 09:13 am

I know I'm late to the show, but:

Nekkoru wrote:

My usual response to conservatives bitching about the liberal bias? "Don't you have anything better to do with your time than to bitch about an online encyclopedia that is also the seventh most popular website in the world"?

The answer to this is no. If the seventh most popular website in the world, an encyclopedia that is trusted as a source of information, is giving people misinformation or imposing its political views on its readers, that is something worth bitching about. I only go to wikipedia for entertainment based information so there won't be any political bias involved in finding out what season of The Simpsons has the episode were Sideshow Bob becomes mayor, but if a bias does exist then the opposition owes it to themselves to make themselves heard about the disparity.

lordsathien wrote:

Syd Lexia wrote:

George Washington Carver likely invented peanut butter first. He never bothered to patent or market most of his peanut uses.

Actually that's the one peanut product he DIDN'T have a hand in.

So says American Dad, anyway

Posted: May 13 2009 09:37 am

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

I know I'm late to the show, but:
The answer to this is no. If the seventh most popular website in the world, an encyclopedia that is trusted as a source of information, is giving people misinformation or imposing its political views on its readers, that is something worth bitching about. I only go to wikipedia for entertainment based information so there won't be any political bias involved in finding out what season of The Simpsons has the episode were Sideshow Bob becomes mayor, but if a bias does exist then the opposition owes it to themselves to make themselves heard about the disparity.

Sweet Cthulhu, here we go again.

So here's the thing - why do you waste your time on "making yourselves heard", if you could just, you know, reedit the bias? Flag an article for neutrality, or something.

Joined: Sep 17 2007 Location: The Opium Trail Posts: 3475

I'm gonna go look up my beloved Maher (who has been on a roll recently) on Conservapedia.

Meh, all it does is call him a "socialist" which he would take as a compliment ironically. Bor-ing.

Posted: May 13 2009 11:53 am

Nekkoru wrote:

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

I know I'm late to the show, but:
The answer to this is no. If the seventh most popular website in the world, an encyclopedia that is trusted as a source of information, is giving people misinformation or imposing its political views on its readers, that is something worth bitching about. I only go to wikipedia for entertainment based information so there won't be any political bias involved in finding out what season of The Simpsons has the episode were Sideshow Bob becomes mayor, but if a bias does exist then the opposition owes it to themselves to make themselves heard about the disparity.

Sweet Cthulhu, here we go again.

So here's the thing - why do you waste your time on "making yourselves heard", if you could just, you know, reedit the bias? Flag an article for neutrality, or something.

As Syd explained, anything you edit will immediately be changed back. When All-Star Batman and Robin #10 was supposed to come out but was recalled because it was poorly censored, I added the information to Wikipedia. It was then promptly removed even though it was accurate and was on a subject that could have no real slant.